Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33596904›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2021

A CTSA One Health Alliance guidance on institutional review of veterinary clinical studies.

S A Moore, A O'Kell, H Borghese, R Garabed, H O'Meara, P Baneux, CTSA One Health Alliance

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

S A MooreDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, 601 Vernon L Tharp St, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA. moore.2204@osu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4311-6199
A O'Kell *Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, University of Florida College of Veterinary Medicine, Gainesville, USA.
H Borghese *The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Blue Buffalo Veterinary Clinical Trials Office, Columbus, USA.
R GarabedDepartment of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Columbus, USA.
H O'MearaThe Ohio State University, Office of Responsible Research Practices, Columbus, USA.
P BaneuxCornell University, Attending veterinarian, Director Center for Animal Resources and Education, Ithaca, USA.
CTSA One Health Alliance

Funding

The OSU Center for Clinical and Translational Science: Advancing Today's Discoveries to Improve HealthUL1TR002733 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI RINGEL, MATTHEW D · 2018 to 2022
$28.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002733NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR002733
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Harmonized institutional processes and reviewer training are vital to maintain integrity and ethical rigor of the veterinary clinical research pipeline and are a prerequisite to future work that might establish centralized or single-site ethical and regulatory review to ease initiation of multi-center studies. Funded by a CTSA One Health Alliance (COHA) pilot award, a diverse working group of veterinary clinicians and institutional representatives was convened in February 2020 to develop a guidance document detailing broadly agreed upon practices for ethical review and approval of veterinary clinical studies conducted in the United States.The working group defined key areas of need for consensus, developed a set of associated guidelines, and circulated these for review by COHA's fifteen member institutions. Six focus areas were identified by the working group and included vital items of protocol review, composition of the review committee, post-approval monitoring and adverse event reporting, consideration of special circumstances such as satellite sites and the use of healthy veterinary subjects in research, and the informed consent process.This document outlines a broadly agreed-upon framework through which to approach vital items associated with veterinary clinical study protocol review and approval. These approaches represent current best practice in the review and approval of veterinary clinical studies, and can serve as a guidance for veterinary clinician-scientists and regulatory experts, to ensure robust and ethically conducted studies that can contribute to the advancement of both animal and human health.

Indexed as

Animal WelfareAnimalsConsent FormsEthics, ResearchOne HealthResearchUnited StatesVeterinary Medicine

Identifiers

PMID33596904
PMCPMC7890984

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.