scholarly journals The ethical justification for the use of animals in biomedical research

2010 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 781-787 ◽  
Author(s):  
N.G. Kostomitsopoulos ◽  
S.F. Djurasevic
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Animal Health ◽  
Team Work ◽  
Ethical Review ◽  
Animal Science ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Ethical Justification ◽  
True Value ◽  
Ethical Review Process ◽  
Responsibility Of Scientists

Despite all the benefits, the use of animals in biomedical research is still a subject of debate with respect to its true value. The sensitivity of the community and the interest of scientists who work in the field of laboratory animal science and welfare have clearly demonstrated that the use of animals in biomedical research must be conducted under specific scientific, legal and ethical rules. The ethical justification of a research project starts from its initial designing phase until its completion and the review of the obtained results. Justification of the necessity of the project and the need to use animals in the interests of human or animal health, the importance of conducting a pilot study and a systematic review of previously published animal research on the topic, and the availability of the proper facilities, equipment and personnel are the main issues of concern in the ethical review of a research project. The ethical justification of the proposed project by the scientists themselves involves team-work, and should be a sustainable rather than a one-off procedure. This justification reflects the interest and the responsibility of scientists to reduce the number of animals, refine the procedures, and possibly replace animals in their research projects. The end-results of the ethical review process will be the creation of a trust relationship between scientists and society. .

scholarly journals Ηθική και Δεοντολογία στη Χρησιμοποίηση Ζώων στη Βιοϊατρική Έρευνα

Bioethica ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Νικόλαος Κωστομητσόπουλος (Nikolaos Kostomitsopoulos)
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Laboratory Animal ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Animal Science ◽  
Ethical Justification ◽  
Research Protocols ◽  
High Standards ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Responsibility Of Scientists ◽  
Selection Of

Despite all the benefits, the use of animals in biomedical research was, and still is, a subject of debate with respect to its true usefulness. The sensitivity of the community and the interest of scientists working in the field of Laboratory Animal Science and Welfare have clearly demonstrated that the use of animals in biomedical research must be conducted under specific scientific, legal and ethical rules.The ethical justification of a research project starts from the initial designing phase of the project until the completion of the study and the review of the obtained results. Main considerations of an ethical documentation are: the precise definition of the goals of the project and the existing probabilities for its success; the selection of the appropriate animal model, the implementation of the 3Rs’ concept for replacement, reduction and refinement; a pilot study and a systematic review of previously published animal research on the topic; the availability of the appropriate facilities, equipment and expertise to guarantee high standards of animal accommodation, husbandry, care and use. The ethical documentation of a project by scientists themselves involves teamwork and a sustainable rather than a one-off procedure.The ethical justification of the laboratory animal research protocols reflects the interest and the responsibility of scientists for reduction and refinement of animal experimentation. This process built a trust relationship between scientists and the society.

scholarly journals Ethics and laboratory animals

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
N. KOSTOMITSOPOULOS (Ν. ΚΩΣΤΟΜΗΤΣΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ)
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Laboratory Animal ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Team Work ◽  
Laboratory Animals ◽  
Ethical Justification ◽  
Expected Benefits ◽  
High Standards

Despite all the benefits, the use of animals in biomedical research was, and still is, a subject of debate with respect to its true usefulness. The sensitivity of the community and the interest of scientists working in the field of laboratory animal science and welfare have clearly demonstrated that the use of animals in biomedical research must be conducted under specific scientific, legal and ethical rules. The ethical justification of a research project starts from the initial designing phase of the project until the completion of the study and the review of the obtained results. Main considerations of an ethical documentation are: the precise definition of the goals of the project and the existing probabilities for its success, the selection of the appropriate animal model, the implementation of the 3Rs' concept for replacement, reduction and refinement, a cost/benefit analysis on the expected benefits for science and society with direct consideration to the harm created to animals, a pilot study and a systematic review of previously published animal research on the topic, the availability of the appropriate facilities, equipment and expertise to guarantee high standards of animal accommodation, husbandry, care and use. The ethical documentation of a project by scientists themselvesinvolves team work and a sustainable rather than a one-off procedure. The ethical justification of the laboratory animal research protocols reflects the interest and the responsibility of scientists for reduction and refinement of animal experimentation. Thisprocess built a trust relationship between scientists and the society.

The Ethics of AI in Biomedical Research, Patient Care, and Public Health

2020 ◽  
pp. 702-718 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Blasimme ◽  
Effy Vayena
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Disease Surveillance ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Ethical Review ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Healthcare Provision ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Ethical Frameworks

This chapter explores ethical issues raised by the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the domain of biomedical research, healthcare provision, and public health. The litany of ethical challenges that AI in medicine raises cannot be addressed sufficiently by current regulatory and ethical frameworks. The chapter then advances the systemic oversight approach as a governance blueprint, which is based on six principles offering guidance as to the desirable features of oversight structures and processes in the domain of data-intense biomedicine: adaptivity, flexibility, inclusiveness, reflexivity, responsiveness, and monitoring (AFIRRM). In the research domain, ethical review committees will have to incorporate reflexive assessment of the scientific and social merits of AI-driven research and, as a consequence, will have to open their ranks to new professional figures such as social scientists. In the domain of patient care, clinical validation is a crucial issue. Hospitals could equip themselves with “clinical AI oversight bodies” charged with the task of advising clinical administrators. Meanwhile, in the public health sphere, the new level of granularity enabled by AI in disease surveillance or health promotion will have to be negotiated at the level of targeted communities.

Ethical Issues in Social Influence Research

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan J. Kimmel
Keyword(s):  
Social Influence ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Scientific Discipline ◽  
Ethical Review ◽  
Ethical Guidelines ◽  
Human Welfare ◽  
Ethical Decisions ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Ethical Review Process ◽  
Privacy And Confidentiality

Social influence researchers encounter a variety of ethical issues in the conduct of their investigations, including those involving deception, privacy, and confidentiality. Facing a growing array of ethical guidelines, governmental regulations, and institutional review, researchers are faced with decisions that often pit the search for scientific knowledge against human welfare. Ethical decisions pertaining to social influence research methodology can have an impact on research participants, organizations, the scientific discipline, and society in general. This chapter surveys ethical issues in the conduct of laboratory, field, online, and applied research; describes remedial efforts (e.g., debriefing) to mitigate adverse research effects; and considers the nature of the ethical review process.

Tackling conservation/welfare conflicts in the management of wild animals

2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 36 ◽  
Author(s):  
James K. Kirkwood
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Ethical Review ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Ethical Review Process

During the last century there were two distinct and profound changes in attitudes to animals. First, it became widely understood that human activities and anthropogenic changes to the environment present a serious threat to biological diversity. In response to this many programmes to protect habitat and to conserve species have been launched. Second, advances in various fields of science led to a strengthening belief in many societies that a wide range of animals may have the capacity for consciousness and thus suffering. This has led to growing concern for the welfare of animals - the quality of their lives - and to the development of extensive bodies of welfare legislation in many countries. Concerns for species conservation and concerns for individual animal welfare do not always pull in the same direction. Around the world, conflicts are becoming commonplace between those who believe it can be justifiable to compromise the interests of individual animals in order to prevent species extinctions and those who do not. Such conflicts may be addressed and hopefully avoided or minimized through use of an ethical review process in which conservation benefits and welfare costs are carefully identified, considered and weighed in a cost/benefit analysis. A second function of this review process is to ensure that, where the decision is taken to proceed with a conservation programme that may adversely affect the welfare of some individuals, all necessary steps are taken to minimize these threats and their possible impacts.

scholarly journals Study protocol: effects, costs and distributional impact of digital primary care for infectious diseases—an observational, registry-based study in Sweden

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e038618
Author(s):  
Jens Wilkens ◽  
Hans Thulesius ◽  
Eva Arvidsson ◽  
Anna Lindgren ◽  
Bjorn Ekman
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Tract Infection ◽  
Health System ◽  
Universal Access ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Ethical Review ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Lower Urinary Tract Infection ◽  
Distributional Impact

IntroductionThe ability to provide primary care with the help of a digital platform raises both opportunities and risks. While access to primary care improves, overuse of services and medication may occur. The use of digital care technologies is likely to continue to increase and evidence of its effects, costs and distributional impacts is needed to support policy-making. Since 2016, the number of digital primary care consultations for a range of conditions has increased rapidly in Sweden. This research project aims to investigate health system effects of this development. The overall research question is to what extent such care is a cost-effective and equitable alternative to traditional, in-office primary care in the context of a publicly funded health system with universal access. Three specific areas of investigation are identified: clinical effect; cost and distributional impact. This protocol describes the investigative approach of the project in terms of aims, design, materials, methods and expected results.Methods and analysisThe research project adopts a retrospective study design and aims to apply statistical analyses of patient-level register data on key variables from seven regions of Sweden over the years 2017–2018. In addition to data on three common infectious conditions (upper respiratory tract infection; lower urinary tract infection; and skin and soft-tissue infection), information on other healthcare use, socioeconomic status and demography will be collected.Ethics and disseminationThis registry-based study has received ethical approval by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. Use of data will follow the Swedish legislation and practice with regards to consent. The results will be disseminated both to the research community, healthcare decision makers and to the general public.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document