ArticleJournal of applied animal ethics research2020
Ethical and Welfare Implications of Genetically Altered Non-Human Primates for Biomedical Research.
Article in Journal of applied animal ethics research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Generation and ophthalmological characterization of oculocutaneous albinism type 1 pig models by selection-free genome editing.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Review
- Experimental modeling of Alzheimer's disease: Translational lessons from cross-taxon analyses.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Review
- Review of Environmental and Health Factors Impacting Captive Common Marmoset Welfare in the Biomedical Research Setting.Veterinary sciences · 2023Review
- Inducible nonhuman primate models of retinal degeneration for testing end-stage therapies.Science advances · 2023Article
- Introducing individual sentience profiles in nonhuman primate neuroscience research.Current research in neurobiology · 2023Review
- Flexible auditory training, psychophysics, and enrichment of common marmosets with an automated, touchscreen-based system.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Breakthroughs in gene editing technologies have made it feasible to create genetically altered (GA) non-human primate (NHP) models of disease. This area of research is accelerating, particularly in China, Japan and the USA, and could lead to an increase in NHP use globally. The hope is that genetic models in animal species closely related to humans will significantly improve understanding of neurological diseases and validation of potential therapeutic interventions, for which there is a dire need. However, the creation and use of GA NHPS raises serious animal welfare and ethical issues, which are highlighted here. It represents a step change in how these highly sentient animals are used in biomedical research, because of the large numbers required, inherent wastage and the sum of the harms caused to the animals involved. There is little evidence of these important issues being addressed alongside the rapidly advancing science. We are still learning about how gene editing tools work in NHPS, and significant added scientific and medical benefit from GA NHP models has yet to be demonstrated. Together, this suggests that current regulatory and review frameworks, in some jurisdictions at least, are not adequately equipped to deal with this emerging, complex area of NHP use.
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.