ArticleVeterinary world2025
Assessing the knowledge of ethical clearance and animal welfare among researchers in Indonesia: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Veterinary world, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Farmer Socio-Demographics on Animal Welfare Knowledge and Practices in Peri-Urban Duck Production Systems.Open veterinary journal · 2026Article
- The Status and Emerging Developments in Laboratory Animal Science in Asia since 9th AFLAS Congress (2023) until 10th AFLAS Congress (2025).Animal models and experimental medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Ethical treatment of animals in scientific research is fundamental to ensuring data integrity and public trust. In Indonesia, the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) plays a key role in ethical oversight, yet the extent of researchers' knowledge regarding its roles and animal welfare (AW) principles remains unclear. This study assessed the level of understanding (UN) of ethical clearance and AW practices among researchers at the Indonesian Centre for Animal Research and Development (ICARD), focusing on variations based on educational background and professional position. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional survey involving 107 researchers from: ICARD was conducted using a structured digital questionnaire assessing knowledge across three domains: IACUC roles, ethical clearance procedures, and AW implementation. Participants were stratified by educational background (veterinary vs. non-veterinary [NV]) and professional position. Non-parametric tests (Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis) were used to evaluate group differences, with post hoc Dunn's tests where applicable. Results: Veterinary researchers showed significantly greater UN of AW implementation (p < 0.01) and marginally higher knowledge of ethical clearance procedures (p < 0.10) compared to non-veterinarians. While IACUC knowledge was high across both groups, no significant differences were found (p = 0.161). By researcher position, prospective researchers demonstrated the lowest comprehension of AW practices (mean rank = 32.30), while junior researchers and research professors had the highest levels (mean ranks = 62.06 and 62.31, respectively). Position-based differences in IACUC and ethical clearance UN were not statistically significant, but significant variation was found in AW implementation (p = 0.035). Conclusion: This study reveals critical disparities in the UN of ethical clearance and AW among Indonesian researchers, particularly between veterinary and NV backgrounds and across researcher positions. Targeted ethics training, especially for early-career and NV researchers, is essential. Institutional policies should reinforce mandatory certification and continuous professional development to foster ethical research practices and enhance AW compliance.
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.