ArticleLaboratory animal research2021
Working with laboratory rodents in Spain: a survey on welfare and wellbeing.
Article in Laboratory animal research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Caring, killing and an always busy schedule: a cross-sectional study on stress and strain in laboratory animal professionals in German-speaking countries.Laboratory animals · 2026Article
- Building bridges: Involvement of animal care staff and laboratory technicians in experimental planning and conduct of animal studies for better job satisfaction and science.Laboratory animals · 2026Article
- How University Students Evaluate the Use of Laboratory Animals: The Role of Species and Individual Differences.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Tell Your Story: Strengthening Scientific Engagement and Welfare Leadership among Animal Technologists.Wellcome open research · 2026Article
- Human-animal bonds: first cross-sectional study in laboratory animal care professionals in Argentina.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Current practices of pain assessment and analgesic use in laboratory mice: A 2022 FELASA Working Group survey.Laboratory animals · 2025Article
- The use of animals in physiological science: the past, the presence, and the future.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2024Article
- Individualized Housing Modifies the Immune-Endocrine System in CD1 Adult Male Mice.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Professional quality of life among Spanish veterinarians.Veterinary record open · 2022Article
- Refinement in the European Union: A Systematic Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- A survey on the use of mice, pigs, dogs and monkeys as animal models in biomedical research in Spain.Laboratory animal research · 2022Article
- Professional Quality of Life in Research Involving Laboratory Animals.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
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
Abstract
backgroundReplacement, reduction and refinement, the 3R principles, provide a framework to minimize the use and suffering of animals in science. In this context, we aimed to determine the actual perception that individuals working with laboratory rodents in biomedical research have on animal welfare and on their interaction with the animals, as well as how they perceive its impact on their social relations. To this end, we designed an anonymous on-line survey for people working with rodents, at three responsibility levels, in Spain.
resultsOf the 356 participants, 239 were women (67 %); 263 were researchers (74 %), and 93 animal facility staff (26 %), of which 55 were caretakers/technicians (15 %), and 38 welfare officer/veterinarians (11 %). Animal facility staff indicated environmental enrichment to be a universal practice. About half of the participants reported that, in their opinion, animals suffer "little to none" or "minor" stress and pain. Animal caretakers/technicians and researchers perceived higher levels of stress and pain than welfare officers/veterinarians. Participants judged decapitation the most unpleasant method to kill rodents, whereas anaesthetic overdose was the least one. A sizable proportion - 21 % of animal caretakers/technicians and 11.4 % of researchers - stated that they were never given the choice not to euthanize the rodents they work with. Overall, women reported higher interactions with animals than men. Nevertheless, we could detect a significant correlation between time spent with the animals and interaction scores. Notably, 80 % of animal facility staff and 92 % of researchers rarely talked about their work with laboratory rodents with people outside their inner social circle.
conclusionsOverall, the participants showed high awareness and sensitivity to rodent wellbeing; animal facility staff reported a similar perception on welfare questions, independently of their category, while researchers, who spent less time with the animals, showed less awareness and manifested lower human-animal interaction and less social support. Regarding the perception on social acceptance of laboratory animal work, all groups were cautious and rarely talked about their job, suggesting that it is considered a sensitive issue in Spain.
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.