Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33620069›Full record

ReviewILAR journal2020

Marmosets: Welfare, Ethical Use, and IACUC/Regulatory Considerations.

Ricki J Colman, Saverio Capuano, Jaco Bakker, Jo Keeley, Katsuki Nakamura, Corinna Ross

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ILAR journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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 at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Ricki J ColmanDepartment of Cell and Regenerative Biology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Saverio CapuanoWisconsin National Primate Research Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Jaco BakkerBiomedical Primate Research Centre, Rijswijk, the Netherlands.
Jo KeeleyUniversity of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Katsuki NakamuraPrimate Research Institute, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Corinna RossDepartment of Life Sciences, Texas A&M University, San Antonio, Texas, USA; and Population Health, Texas Biomedical Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USBiomedical Primate Research Centre · NLKyoto University · JPTexas Biomedical Research Institute · USUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

WNPRC Supplemental Request for Nonhuman Primate Enclosures to Equip HIV/AIDS-Related Research FacilitiesP51OD011106 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Dorota A. Grejner-Brzezinska · 2012 to 2026
$150.7M
San Antonio OAIC - Research Education Component (REC)P30AG044271 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI Adam Salmon · 2015 to 2026
$14.1M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG044271NIH HHS P51 OD011106
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Use of marmosets in biomedical research has increased dramatically in recent years due, in large part, to their suitability for transgenic applications and utility as models for neuroscience investigations. This increased use includes the establishment of new colonies and involvement of people new to marmoset research. To facilitate the use of the marmoset as a research model, we provide an overview of issues surrounding the ethics and regulations associated with captive marmoset research, including discussion of the history of marmosets in research, current uses of marmosets, ethical considerations related to marmoset use, issues related to importation of animals, and recommendations for regulatory oversight of gene-edited marmosets. To understand the main concerns that oversight bodies have regarding captive biomedical research with marmosets, we developed a brief, 15-question survey that was then sent electronically to academic and biomedical research institutions worldwide that were believed to house colonies of marmosets intended for biomedical research. The survey included general questions regarding the individual respondent's colony, status of research use of the colony and institutional oversight of both the colony itself and the research use of the colony. We received completed surveys from a total of 18 institutions from North America, Europe, and Asia. Overall, there appeared to be no clear difference in regulatory oversight body concerns between countries/regions. One difference that we were able to appreciate was that while biomedical research with marmosets was noted to be either stable or decreasing in Europe, use was clearly increasing elsewhere.

Indexed as

Animal Care CommitteesBiomedical ResearchAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedCallithrixbiomedical researchgene-editedmarmosetneuroscienceregulatory oversighttransgenicwelfare

Identifiers

PMID33620069
PMCPMC9214643
OpenAlexW3132739026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.