Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33418072›Full record

ReviewNeuroImage2021

International primate neuroscience research regulation, public engagement and transparency opportunities.

Anna S Mitchell, Renée Hartig, Michele A Basso, Wendy Jarrett, Sabine Kastner, Colline Poirier

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NeuroImage, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Invasive Research on Non-Human Primates-Time to Turn the Page.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Alternative Animal Models of Aging Research.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Anna S MitchellDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. Electronic address: anna.mitchell@psy.ox.ac.uk.
Renée HartigCentre for Integrative Neurosciences, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany; Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Michele A BassoFuster Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences UCLA Los Angeles 90095, CA United States.
Wendy JarrettUnderstanding Animal Research, London, United Kingdom.
Sabine KastnerPrinceton Neuroscience Institute & Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States.
Colline PoirierBiosciences Institute & Centre for Behaviour and Evolution, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, United Kingdom.

Funding

Visual Target Selection for Saccadic Eye MovementsR01EY013692 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BASSO, MICHELE A · 2002 to 2021
$7.0M
Functions of the Thalamus in Perception and CognitionR01EY017699 · NEI · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI SABINE KASTNER · 2007 to 2026
$6.4M
Neural mechanisms of attentionR01MH064043 · NIMH · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI KASTNER, SABINE, KNIGHT, ROBERT THOMAS · 2002 to 2020
$5.2M
Changes across the lifespan in the use of heuristics to guide decision-makingR01AG063090 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BASSO, MICHELE A · 2019 to 2023
$3.8M
An Open Source, Wireless, Miniature Microscope for Monitoring Neuronal ActivityUF1NS107668 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BASSO, MICHELE A, GOLSHANI, PEYMAN · 2018 to 2018
$3.7M
National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/K000802/1NEI NIH HHS R01 EY013692NEI NIH HHS R01 EY017699NIA NIH HHS R01 AG063090NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH064043NINDS NIH HHS UF1 NS107668Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 110157/Z/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Scientific excellence is a necessity for progress in biomedical research. As research becomes ever more international, establishing international collaborations will be key to advancing our scientific knowledge. Understanding the similarities in standards applied by different nations to animal research, and where the differences might lie, is crucial. Cultural differences and societal values will also contribute to these similarities and differences between countries and continents. Our overview is not comprehensive for all species, but rather focuses on non-human primate (NHP) research, involving New World marmosets and Old World macaques, conducted in countries where NHPs are involved in neuroimaging research. Here, an overview of the ethics and regulations is provided to help assess welfare standards amongst primate research institutions. A comparative examination of these standards was conducted to provide a basis for establishing a common set of standards for animal welfare. These criteria may serve to develop international guidelines, which can be managed by an International Animal Welfare and Use Committee (IAWUC). Internationally, scientists have a moral responsibility to ensure excellent care and welfare of their animals, which in turn, influences the quality of their research. When working with animal models, maintaining a high quality of care ("culture of care") and welfare is essential. The transparent promotion of this level of care and welfare, along with the results of the research and its impact, may reduce public concerns associated with animal experiments in neuroscience research.

Indexed as

InternationalityAccess to InformationAnimalsAnimal WelfareBiomedical ResearchCommittee MembershipHumansNeurosciencesPrimatesCulture of careHousing standardsMRINeuroimagingPrimatesPublic engagementWelfare

Identifiers

PMID33418072
PMCPMC7994292

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.