Abstract
There are two components to the review of animal based protocols in Canada: review for the merit of the study itself, and review of the ethical acceptability of the work. Despite the perceived importance for the quality assurance these reviews provide; there are few studies of the peer-based merit review system for animal-based protocols for research and education. Institutional animal care committees (ACC)s generally rely on the external peer review of scientific merit for animal-based research. In contrast, peer review for animal based teaching/training is dependent on the review of pedagogical merit carried out by the ACC itself or another committee within the institution. The objective of this study was to evaluate the views of ACC members about current practices and policies as well as alternate policies for the review of animal based teaching/training. We conducted a national web-based survey of ACC members with both quantitative and qualitative response options. Responses from 167 ACC members indicated broad concerns about administrative burden despite strong support for both the current and alternate policies. Participants’ comments focused mostly on the merit review process (54%) relative to the efficiency (21%), impact (13%), and other (12%) aspects of evaluation. Approximately half (49%) of the comments were classified into emergent themes that focused on some type of burden: burden from additional pedagogical merit review (16%), a limited need for the review (12%), and a lack of resources (expertise 11%; people/money 10%). Participants indicated that the current system for pedagogical merit review is effective (60%); but most also indicated that there was at least some challenge (86%) with the current peer review process. There was broad support for additional guidance on the justification, criteria, types of animal use, and objectives of pedagogical merit review. Participants also supported the ethical review and application of the Three Rs in the review process. A clear priority from participants in the survey was updating guidance to better facilitate the merit review process of animal-based protocols for education. Balancing the need for improved guidance with the reality of limited resources at local institutions will be essential to do this successfully; a familiar dilemma to both scientists and policy makers alike.
Highlights
Peer review is considered to be the cornerstone of sound science [1]
Peer review for animal based teaching/training is dependent on the review of pedagogical merit carried out by the animal care committees (ACCs) itself or another committee within the institution
The Council on Animal Care (CCAC) has evolved its guidance on pedagogical merit review over time
Summary
Peer review is considered to be the cornerstone of sound science [1]. The peer review of animal-based studies, is considered to be a cornerstone of the system overseeing animalbased science. The term ‘pedagogical’ was first introduced in the Guide to the Care and Use of Experimental Animals [5] as well as the idea of a separate committee establishing the ‘pedagogical merit’ for animal-based courses, which would form part of the protocol submission to the ACC This concept was updated and expanded in two subsequent policy documents [6,8] which further outlined the responsibilities of the local ACCs. This concept was updated and expanded in two subsequent policy documents [6,8] which further outlined the responsibilities of the local ACCs This left the ACC at liberty to conduct a pedagogical merit review itself or to call upon an institutional curriculum committee to provide the review [5]. These guidelines and CCAC’s overarching policy frame animal-based teaching/training as ‘markedly different’ than animal-based research and recommend items that reviewers may consider during the review such as justification for animal-based teaching/training over the use of non-animal alternatives
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
