Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39375824›Full record

ReviewAnimal models and experimental medicine2024

Animal models in neuroscience with alternative approaches: Evolutionary, biomedical, and ethical perspectives.

Sabina Neziri, Ahmet Efe Köseoğlu, Gülsüm Deniz Köseoğlu, Buminhan Özgültekin, Nehir Özdemir Özgentürk

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal models and experimental medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 3D Printing for Neural Repair: Bridging the Gap in Regenerative Medicine.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
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

5 authors.

Sabina NeziriDepartment of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Faculty of Art and Science, Yıldız Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-3867-6001
Ahmet Efe KöseoğluCOMED Therapeutics, Malta Life Sciences Park, San Gwann, Malta.ORCID 0000-0002-3505-4397
Gülsüm Deniz KöseoğluExperimental Eye Research Institute, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5948-8491
Buminhan ÖzgültekinDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Acıbadem University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-5193-7149
Nehir Özdemir ÖzgentürkDepartment of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Faculty of Art and Science, Yıldız Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-3809-6303

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animal models have been a crucial tool in neuroscience research for decades, providing insights into the biomedical and evolutionary mechanisms of the nervous system, disease, and behavior. However, their use has raised concerns on several ethical, clinical, and scientific considerations. The welfare of animals and the 3R principles (replacement, reduction, refinement) are the focus of the ethical concerns, targeting the importance of reducing the stress and suffering of these models. Several laws and guidelines are applied and developed to protect animal rights during experimenting. Concurrently, in the clinic and biomedical fields, discussions on the relevance of animal model findings on human organisms have increased. Latest data suggest that in a considerable amount of time the animal model results are not translatable in humans, costing time and money. Alternative methods, such as in vitro (cell culture, microscopy, organoids, and micro physiological systems) techniques and in silico (computational) modeling, have emerged as potential replacements for animal models, providing more accurate data in a minimized cost. By adopting alternative methods and promoting ethical considerations in research practices, we can achieve the 3R goals while upholding our responsibility to both humans and other animals. Our goal is to present a thorough review of animal models used in neuroscience from the biomedical, evolutionary, and ethical perspectives. The novelty of this research lies in integrating diverse points of views to provide an understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of animal models in neuroscience and in discussing potential alternative methods.

Indexed as

Models, AnimalNeurosciencesAnimalsAnimal WelfareBiological EvolutionHumansalternativesanimal modelsbiomedicineethicsevolutionneuroscience

Identifiers

PMID39375824
PMCPMC11680486

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.