SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2014
The ethical dimension in published animal research in critical care: the public face of science.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Are biologically meaningful effect sizes a factor in study design? A systematic review of translational chronic variable stress studies.Experimental physiology · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Article
- Development and characterization of a fecal-induced peritonitis model of murine sepsis: results from a multi-laboratory study and iterative modification of experimental conditions.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2023Article
- Anesthesia and analgesia for common research models of adult mice.Laboratory animal research · 2022Review
- Investigating the Effect of an Oxytetracycline Treatment on the Gut Microbiome and Antimicrobial Resistance Gene Dynamics in Nile Tilapia (Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- National Preclinical Sepsis Platform: developing a framework for accelerating innovation in Canadian sepsis research.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2021Article
- The Influence of Pain and Analgesia in Rodent Models of Sepsis.Comparative medicine · 2019Review
- Part I: Minimum Quality Threshold in Preclinical Sepsis Studies (MQTiPSS) for Study Design and Humane Modeling Endpoints.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2019Review
- Body temperature and mouse scoring systems as surrogate markers of death in cecal ligation and puncture sepsis.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2018Article
- Animal experimental research design in critical care.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Article
- Improving animal welfare using continuous nalbuphine infusion in a long-term rat model of sepsis.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2017Article
- Pain and Laboratory Animals: Publication Practices for Better Data Reproducibility and Better Animal Welfare.PloS one · 2016Article
- Article
- Applying refinement to the use of mice and rats in rheumatoid arthritis research.Inflammopharmacology · 2015Review
- Expectations for methodology and translation of animal research: a survey of health care workers.BMC medical ethics · 2015Article
- Criticizing reporting standards fails to improve quality in animal research.Critical care (London, England) · 2014Article
- The ethical dimension in published animal research in critical care: the dark side of our moon.Critical care (London, England) · 2014Article
- The methodological quality of animal research in critical care: the public face of science.Annals of intensive care · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe ethical quality of animal research is important for many reasons, including for maintaining public support. We aimed to determine the reported attention to the ethical dimensions of the 3Rs (Refinement, Reduction, and Replacement) in critical care animal research published in 2012.
methodsA data-collection form and instruction manual were created based on published recommendations, and completed for all consecutive critical care animal research (using mammals) publications from January to June 2012 in three critical care journals. Predefined subgroups were by journal, sepsis model, and animal age, compared by using the χ2 statistic, with statistical significance accepted at P < 0.05.
resultsIn total, 77 consecutive animal research publications were reviewed. Most studies did not report monitoring the level of anesthesia during invasive procedures, even when muscle paralytics were used, nor monitoring or treatment of expected pain. When euthanasia was used, the method was often not stated, and when stated, most methods were not appropriate for the species. A sample-size calculation was rarely used, and animal numbers were often poorly described. No studies performed a systematic review to ensure that the animal research would be useful and not simple repetition. Seventeen (22%) publications met the composite outcome of, if indicated, using anesthesia and pain control, and stating the method of euthanasia. Most studies were funded with public funds (foundation or government funding). Sepsis models less often met the composite outcome of, if indicated, using anesthesia and pain control, and stating the method of euthanasia (2 (7%) of 27 versus 15 (30%) of 50; P = 0.023). No other statistically significant differences were found in reporting of any criterion by animal age, sepsis model, or journal.
conclusionsReported (although not necessarily actual) ethical quality of animal research in three high-impact critical care journals during 6 months of 2012 was poor. This has important implications for the practice of critical care animal research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.