Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Assigning ethical weights to clinical signs observed during toxicity testing
Philosophy and History, KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Philosophy and History of Technology, Philosophy.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0071-3919
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Altex, ISSN 1868-596X, E-ISSN 1868-8551, Vol. 34, no 1, p. 148-156Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Reducing the number of laboratory animals used and refining experimental procedures to enhance animal welfare are fundamental questions to be considered in connection with animal experimentation. Here, we explored the use of cardinal ethical weights for clinical signs and symptoms in rodents by conducting trade-off interviews with members of Swedish Animal Ethics Committees in order to derive such weights for nine typical clinical signs of toxicity. The participants interviewed represent researchers, politically nominated political nominees and representatives of animal welfare organizations. We observed no statistically significant differences between these groups with respect to the magnitude of the ethical weights assigned, though the political nominees tended to assign lower weights. Overall, hunched posture was considered the most severe clinical sign and body weight loss the least severe. The ethical weights assigned varied considerably between individuals, from zero to infinite value, indicating discrepancies in prioritization of reduction and refinement. Cardinal ethical weights may be utilized to include both animal welfare refinement and reduction of animal use in designing as well as in retrospective assessment of animal experiments. Such weights may also be used to estimate ethical costs of animal experiments.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier GmbH , 2017. Vol. 34, no 1, p. 148-156
Keywords [en]
3Rs, Animal ethics, Ethical committees, Ethical weights, Toxicity testing, animal model, animal use, body posture, human, human experiment, interview, nonhuman, organization, professional standard, rodent, scientist, symptom, weight reduction
National Category
Medical Ethics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-207433DOI: 10.14573/altex.1512211ISI: 000396612700008Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85012026133OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-207433DiVA, id: diva2:1098272
Note

QC 20170523

Available from: 2017-05-23 Created: 2017-05-23 Last updated: 2017-05-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Hansson, Sven Ove

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hansson, Sven Ove
By organisation
Philosophy
In the same journal
Altex
Medical Ethics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 18 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf