Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37396988›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2023

Advancing the 3Rs: innovation, implementation, ethics and society.

Herwig Grimm, Nikola Biller-Andorno, Thorsten Buch, Maik Dahlhoff, Gail Davies, Christopher R Cederroth, Otto Maissen, Wilma Lukas, Elisa Passini, Elin Törnqvist and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors.

Herwig GrimmMesserli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Nikola Biller-AndornoInstitute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Thorsten BuchInstitute of Laboratory Animal Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Maik DahlhoffInstitute of in vivo and in vitro Models, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Gail DaviesDepartment of Geography, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Christopher R CederrothSwiss 3Rs Competence Centre, Bern, Switzerland.
Otto MaissenFederal Food Safety and Veterinary Office, Animal Welfare Division, Bern, Switzerland.
Wilma LukasInnosuisse - Swiss Innovation Agency, Bern, Switzerland.
Elisa PassiniNational Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs), London, United Kingdom.
Elin TörnqvistDepartment of Animal Health and Antimicrobial Strategies, Swedish National Veterinary Institute (SVA), Uppsala, Sweden.
I Anna S OlssonLaboratory Animal Science, i3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Jenny SandströmSwiss 3Rs Competence Centre, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 205393/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 3Rs principle of replacing, reducing and refining the use of animals in science has been gaining widespread support in the international research community and appears in transnational legislation such as the European Directive 2010/63/EU, a number of national legislative frameworks like in Switzerland and the UK, and other rules and guidance in place in countries around the world. At the same time, progress in technical and biomedical research, along with the changing status of animals in many societies, challenges the view of the 3Rs principle as a sufficient and effective approach to the moral challenges set by animal use in research. Given this growing awareness of our moral responsibilities to animals, the aim of this paper is to address the question: Can the 3Rs, as a policy instrument for science and research, still guide the morally acceptable use of animals for scientific purposes, and if so, how? The fact that the increased availability of alternatives to animal models has not correlated inversely with a decrease in the number of animals used in research has led to public and political calls for more radical action. However, a focus on the simple measure of total animal numbers distracts from the need for a more nuanced understanding of how the 3Rs principle can have a genuine influence as a guiding instrument in research and testing. Hence, we focus on three core dimensions of the 3Rs in contemporary research: (1) What scientific

Indexed as

3Rsanimal researchethicsimplementationinnovation

Identifiers

PMID37396988
PMCPMC10310538

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.