ArticlePloS one2018
Researchers' attitudes to the 3Rs-An upturned hierarchy?
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Animals as Communication Partners: Ethics and Challenges in Interspecies Language Research.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Lane-Petter's Pipeline: Why reliably decreasing animal research takes more than replacements.European journal for philosophy of science · 2026Article
- Embedding laboratory animal welfare- and ethics-related techniques into a comparative medicine laboratory course: an educational reform study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Institutional animal care and use committees and the challenges of evaluating animal research proposals.Research integrity and peer review · 2025Review
- Long-Term Experiences of Basic Education in Laboratory Animal Science.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Article
- "Killing in the Name of 3R?" The Ethics of Death in Animal Research.Journal of agricultural & environmental ethics · 2025Article
- Article
- One R or the other - an experimental bioethics approach to 3R dilemmas in animal research.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2024Article
- Interdisciplinary Animal Research Ethics-Challenges, Opportunities, and Perspectives.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Laboratory animal ethics education improves medical students' awareness of laboratory animal ethics.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Description of patterns of ear and tail lesions during the grower-finisher period in a commercial pig farm.Porcine health management · 2024Article
- Conceptual foundations for a clarified meaning of the 3Rs principles in animal experimentation.Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2024Review
- SpheroMold: modernizing the hanging drop method for spheroid culture.Frontiers in drug delivery · 2024Article
- Reporting of 3Rs Approaches in Preclinical Animal Experimental Studies-A Nationwide Study.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Research Animal Behavioral Management Programs for the 21st Century.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Protocol to Assess the Biological Activity of Insulin Glargine, Insulin Lispro, and Insulin Aspart In Vitro.Methods and protocols · 2023Article
- Advancing the 3Rs: innovation, implementation, ethics and society.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Merits and challenges of iPSC-derived organoids for clinical applications.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal use in biomedical research is generally justified by its potential benefits to the health of humans, or other animals, or the environment. However, ethical acceptability also requires scientists to limit harm to animals in their research. Training in laboratory animal science (LAS) helps scientists to do this by promoting best practice and the 3Rs. This study evaluated scientists' awareness and application of the 3Rs, and their approach to other ethical issues in animal research. It was based on an online survey of participants in LAS courses held in eight venues in four European countries: Portugal (Porto, Braga), Germany (Munich, Heidelberg), Switzerland (Basel, Lausanne, Zurich), and Denmark (Copenhagen). The survey questions were designed to assess general attitudes to animal use in biomedical research, Replacement alternatives, Reduction and Refinement conflicts, and harm-benefit analysis. The survey was conducted twice: immediately before the course ('BC', N = 310) and as a follow-up six months after the course ('AC', N = 127). While courses do appear to raise awareness of the 3Rs, they had no measurable effect on the existing low level of belief that animal experimentation can be fully replaced by non-animal methods. Most researchers acknowledged ethical issues with their work and reported that they discussed these with their peers. The level of an animal's welfare, and especially the prevention of pain, was regarded as the most pressing ethical issue, and as more important than the number of animals used or the use of animals as such. Refinement was considered more feasible than Replacement, as well as more urgent, and was also favoured over Reduction. Respondents in the survey reversed the 'hierarchy' of the 3Rs proposed by their architects, Russell and Burch, prioritizing Refinement over Reduction, and Reduction over Replacement. This ordering may conflict with the expectations of the public and regulators.
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.