Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37259162›Full record

ArticleLaboratory animal research2023

Use of laboratory animals and issues regarding the procurement of animals for research in Korea.

Na Ahn, Jaehak Park, Sangho Roh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Laboratory animal research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Na AhnDepartment of Pet Health, Kwangju Women's University, Gwangju, 62396, Korea.
Jaehak ParkLaboratory Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, 08826, Korea.
Sangho RohSchool of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, 08826, Korea. sangho@snu.ac.kr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8082-6459

Funding

Kwangju Women`s University KWU23-046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaboratory animals remain critical to biomedical research, despite the increasing availability of alternative approaches. Indeed, scientists strive to reduce and refine and replace the use of laboratory animals, even in the face of public calls for ever-more stringent regulation for the protection and care of animals in research. This report outlines the current status and legal regulatory issues with regard to the procurement and use of animals for research in Korea.

resultsThe number of animals used for education and research purposes was increased nationwide, from 2.5 to 4.9 million in 2015 and 2021, respectively. When compared with figures from the UK, institutions in Korea were found to use more mammals such as mice and dogs. In our research, we identified three major issues concerning recent animal supply in Korea, particularly: (1) Purchase of dogs from unregistered animal supplier for a dog cloning project; (2) Purchase of dogs from an unclear source for veterinary education and training; (3) Illegal cat experiments using cats obtained from unauthorized routes.

conclusionsOur findings support the notion that alternatives to laboratory animal research should be implemented. We conclude that improvements in the regulations and guidelines for animal suppliers, together with the recent introduction of legislation will improve animal safety and wellbeing of animals in laboratory research in Korea.

Indexed as

Animal ethicsAnimal experimentAnimal procurementAnimal welfareLaboratory animals

Identifiers

PMID37259162
PMCPMC10232344

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.