The ethical dimension in published animal research in critical care: The dark side of our moon

Research output: Contribution to journalComment / DebateOtherpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The replacement, refinement, and reduction (3Rs) guidelines are the cornerstone of animal welfare practice for medical research. Nowadays, no animal research can be performed without being approved by an animal ethics committee. Therefore, we should expect that any published article would respect and promote the highest standard of animal welfare. However, in the previous issue of Critical Care, Bara and Joffe reported an unexpected finding: animal welfare is extremely poorly reported in critical care research publications involving animal models. This may have a significant negative impact on the reliability of the results and on future funding for our research. The ability of septic shock animal models to translate into clinical studies has been a challenge. Therefore, every means to improve the quality of these models should be pursued. Animal welfare issues should be seen as an additional benefit to achieve this goal. It is therefore critical to draw conclusions from this study to improve the standard of animal welfare in critical care research. This has already been achieved in other fields of research, and we should follow their example.

Original languageEnglish
Article number120
Number of pages2
JournalCritical Care
Volume18
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 13 Mar 2014
Externally publishedYes

Cite this