ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021
Legal Frameworks and Controls for the Protection of Research Animals: A Focus on the Animal Welfare Body with a French Case Study.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can a water-based mist form of the F3 facial pheromone have a short-term effect on cats' adaptation to a new situation?Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Crossing the comfort zone: rabbit appeasing pheromone enhances acclimation to a novel environment.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Cutaneous application of SecurePig® FLASH, a Pig appeasing pheromone analogue, facilitates adaptation and manages social behavior during feeding in semi-extensive conditions.Porcine health management · 2024Article
- Considerations for implementing regulation of decapods in science.Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2024Review
- Article
- Robustness of a multivariate composite score when evaluating distress of animal models for gastrointestinal diseases.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, efforts have been devoted to improving the welfare of laboratory animals. Scientific progress and growing concerns over animal harm have pushed institutions to strengthen their laws to make science more humane and responsible. European Directive 2010/63/EU makes it mandatory for breeders, suppliers and users of laboratory animals to have an animal welfare body (AWB) to prioritize animal welfare and harmonize experimental standards while reassuring the public that research is being carried out appropriately. Based on application of the three Rs (refinement, reduction and replacement), these bodies provide staff with oversight and advisory functions to support compliance with the legal requirements on both animal housing and project realization. This review aims to present the legal measures protecting research animals, with a focus on European AWBs. The review explains how the mission of AWBs includes development of environmental enrichment programs and how animal training generates benefits not only for animal welfare but also for the research work environment and research quality. A French case study is conducted to provide the scientific community with an example of an AWB's functioning and activities, share its achievements and propose some perspectives for the future.
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.