A study of three IACUCs and their views of scientific merit and alternatives

25Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Two ethical issues facing Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) today are assessing scientific merit and the use of alternatives in research proposals. This study evaluated 3 IACUCs using a 19-question survey, with a 77.8% response rate. Although 76% of members answered that scientific merit should be more diligently assessed if more than slight pain is caused, 14% believed that assessing scientific merit is not the role of the IACUC. Nearly 86% agreed that the search for alternatives should be more diligent for protocols that incur more than slight pain to the animals involved. Some members believed that alternatives were not actively enough sought after, while others believed no viable alternatives existed. Additional guidelines are needed to clarify these issues. Copyright © 2002, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Graham, K. (2002). A study of three IACUCs and their views of scientific merit and alternatives. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 5(1), 75–81. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327604JAWS0501_7

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free