Reliability of Protocol Reviews for Animal Research

@article{Plous2001ReliabilityOP,
  title={Reliability of Protocol Reviews for Animal Research},
  author={Scott Plous and Harold A. Herzog},
  journal={Science},
  year={2001},
  volume={293},
  pages={608 - 609}
}
A random sample of 50 Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) participated in a study of the protocol review process. Each committee submitted three animal behavior protocols it had recently reviewed, and these protocols were reviewed a second time by another participating committee. The results reported in this Policy Forum showed low levels of reliability in protocol judgments within and between committees. In addition, a majority of approved research protocols were… 

A self-assessment survey of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, Part 1: animal welfare and protocol compliance

TLDR
It was found that 98% of all respondents believed that their IAC UCs advanced animal welfare, but in many instances, veterinarians' responses to individual survey items were significantly different from those of other IACUC members.

The role of the animal ethics committee in achieving humane animal experimentation

TLDR
AEC effectiveness could be improved by clarifying the role of the community member, the relation between AEC and scientific peer review, and the elements of cost-benefit assessments, by expanding policy to acknowledge the various issues and approaches used in decision-making, identifying standards for assessing AEC performance, and expanding the Three Rs to respond to the range of views and values that enter into decisions by AEC members.

A self-assessment survey of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, Part 2: structure and organizational functions

TLDR
An anonymous survey to solicit opinions on the structure and organizational functions of IACUCs found that most respondents believed a single, institution-based IacUC was an appropriate venue for institutional approval of animal care and use, that their IAC UCs represented their institutions' constituencies and that the unaffiliated IACuc members adequately represented their surrounding communities.

Assessing the animal ethics review process

Although animal experiments play an important role in biomedical research, their use is ethically challenging. Primarily in Europe, North America and Australasia ethics committees are set up to

Decisions about the Use of Animals in Research: Ethical Reflection by Animal Ethics Committee Members

TLDR
Policy may invalidate how some AEC members naturally make decisions, and AEC effectiveness could be improved by clarifying the elements of harm-benefit assessments and the relation between AEC and scientific peer review, keeping in mind that peer review does not offer the same assurances that the AEC brings.

Animal Ethical Evaluation: An Observational Study of Canadian IACUCs

TLDR
Three Canadian institutional animal care and use committees were observed over a 1-year period to investigate animal ethical evaluation and revealed that ethical concerns were implicit in both scientific and technical comments.

Institution animal care and use committees need greater ethical diversity

  • L. Hansen
  • Psychology
    Journal of Medical Ethics
  • 2012
TLDR
It is suggested that an infusion of ethical diversity by increasing the percentage of institutionally unaffiliated members on IACUCs would broaden their ethical perspectives and enable them to better address public concerns about laboratory animal welfare.

The Interpretation and Application of the Three Rs by Animal Ethics Committee Members

TLDR
The study suggests ways to achieve more consistent application of the Three Rs, by providing AECs with up-to-date information on the ThreeRs and with access to statistical expertise, by consensus-building on divisive issues, and by training on the scope and implementation of the three Rs.

i The institutional review board is an impediment to human research: the result is more animal-based research

  • M. J. Rice
  • Biology
    Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM
  • 2011
TLDR
Animals are used for investigations even when scientists believe these studies should be performed with humans or human tissue, as neither patients nor animals are well served by the present situation.

Critical Analysis of Assessment Studies of the Animal Ethics Review Process †

  • O. Varga
  • Psychology
    Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
  • 2013
TLDR
Studies that assess the performance of animal ethics committees by using Donabedian’s structure-process-outcome model are reviewed, and the animal suffering is considered as a potential measure for outcome assessment of the ethics review.
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 10 REFERENCES

Developing standards in animal research review.

  • R. Dresser
  • Psychology
    Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
  • 1989
TLDR
Thirty-two institutional animal care and use committees reviewed 4 hypothetic protocols involving experimental procedures frequently conducted on animals, and committee responses delineated emerging standards governing specific areas of animal use, such as antibody production, induced disease, surgery, physical restraint, and behavioral conditioning.

Inconsistency and institutional review boards.

To assess the adequacy of peer review for research on human subjects, identical research protocols in oncology and anesthesiology were submitted to 32 institutional review boards (IRBs) at major

The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation

Abstract The reliability of peer review of scientific documents and the evaluative criteria scientists use to judge the work of their peers are critically reexamined with special attention to the

An intervention to improve the reliability of manuscript reviews for the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

TLDR
The data confirm that the reliability of ratings of scientific articles may be improved by increasing the number of rating scale points, eliciting ratings of separate, concrete items rather than a global judgment, using training manuals, and averaging the scores of multiple reviewers.

ON THE METHODS AND THEORY OF RELIABILITY

TLDR
This paper reviews the most frequently used and misused reliability measures appearing in the mental health literature and suggests some suitable reliability measures to be used.

A Computer Program for Determining the Reliability of Dimensionally Scaled Data when the Numbers and Specific Sets of Examiners may Vary at Each Assessment

Using a variant of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), this program computes the reliability of dimensionally scaled variables when both the number and specific set of judges vary from one

Dale for their research assistance, D. Cicchetti for statistical consultation, and G. Borkowski for advice on survey design. Supported by NSF grant SBR-9616801

  • www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL
  • 2001