Coalition to Illuminate and Address Animal Methods Bias

The COLAAB website is live!    👉 www.animalmethodsbias.org   It provides info about #AnimalMethodsBias and houses the resource we created for researchers who use animal-free approaches to help avoid its negative consequences—the Author Guide for Addressing Animal Methods Bias in Publishing. Check it out and share with your colleagues!    Big shoutout to the web development team at Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine who took a manuscript (https://lnkd.in/e9edc-BJ) and turned it into webpages, databases, and even an integrated Zotero library of over 800 papers and other resources! Let us know if you can think of other experimental resources, journals, or references to add. This is a living resource we intend to keep up-to-date with the rapidly evolving field of #NAMs!

Don’t miss the COLAAB’s Catharine E. Krebs at the Young TPI Impact Workshop on October 31st! You can stay up-to-date on all COLAAB events and appearances on our website here: https://lnkd.in/gQrs6Q-X

The International Foundation for Ethical Research (IFER) is leading the way among funders by conducting its own internal survey about #animalmethodsbias. Respondents indicated that, in their experience, it's more difficult to obtain funding for projects using nonanimal methods due to the preference for animal-based studies in the grant review process.   Funders will play a critical role in assessing the influence of animal methods bias and mitigating its harms. Kudos to #IFER for taking this first step!

There was an exciting development toward mitigating animal methods bias at the recent U.S. National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review (CSR) Advisory Council meeting! At the NIH, CSR oversees activities that aim for fair, expert, and timely scientific review of incoming grant applications to ensure that the agency funds the most promising research. Within the CSR Advisory Council, a Reviewer Evaluation Working Group was charged with developing a practical framework for evaluating reviewer performance that allows for a uniform, structured, consistent, and transparent approach to performance assessment and improvement. Domain 3 of the new framework evaluates reviewers on impartiality and open-mindedness. Within this domain, Indicator 2 evaluates reviewers on their ability to provide impartial, objective assessments, and specifically that they do not exhibit scientific or methodological bias! In the previous CSR Advisory Council meeting, we advocated for the Center to explore, acknowledge, and begin to address the negative impacts of animal methods bias. See: https://lnkd.in/edvWDKcU While much remains in exploring and addressing #animalmethodsbias, this is the first time we’ve seen CSR use the term “methodological bias” and signals an important shift in the way the NIH is thinking about unfounded biases against certain methods (including, hopefully, NAMs!) You can watch a recording of the Advisory Council meeting here (the Reviewer Evaluation Working Group presentation starts at 2:55:20): https://lnkd.in/eeQdtH8Z. And you can find the presentation slides here: https://lnkd.in/eeGwDJA8

It's #PeerReviewWeek! Have you heard about this newly described type of peer review bias?    #AnimalMethodsBias is the preference for animal-based research methods or lack of expertise to properly evaluate nonanimal methods, resulting in unfair assessments of animal-free research.    New nonanimal research approaches like tissue chips can mimic complex human biology and therapeutic responses. They can replace animals in many applications and are becoming a crucial tool for biomedical research and drug development, but barriers remain.    #PublishOrPerish can incentivize researchers to capitulate to reviewer expectations or requests, including requests for animal experiments in studies that are otherwise animal-free and which authors feel aren't scientifically or ethically justified. https://lnkd.in/gqq8Tb-D    More empirical evidence of animal methods bias is needed (and some is on the way 👀). It’s still unclear:   🔢 What the prevalence of reviewer requests for animal experiments is  📈 What the relationship between animal use, journal impact factor, & area of research are  💵 Whether animal methods bias occurs in other contexts like grant review, hiring, and tenure    Want to learn more?    1⃣ Researchers who use animal-free biomedical approaches can use our Author Guide for Addressing Animal Methods Bias in Publishing to help ensure the fair dissemination of their work & prevent unnecessary experiments on animals at the behest of #reviewer2. 👉 www.animalmethodsbias.org     2⃣ Read our recently published overview of animal methods bias to learn more about this emerging peer review bias! https://lnkd.in/eVx-aDtg    3⃣ Read our recent commentary for other animal methods bias mitigation strategies! https://lnkd.in/eZBesbfP    4⃣ Join us on December 18th at 1 pm ET/7 pm CET for a 3Rs Training Webinar where Catharine E. Krebs of the COLAAB and Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine will provide an overview of animal methods bias, including the latest evidence. Learn more and register here: https://lnkd.in/ewpf2wxq    Please join us in calling for biomedical stakeholders, especially publishers, funders, and meta-researchers, to explore animal methods bias independently! 

Bianca Marigliani of Humane Society International and the COLAAB recently attended V Colama to present her talk on the Author Guide for Addressing Animal Methods Bias in Publishing, to be used by researchers using animal-free methods to avoid the negative consequences of #AnimalMethodsBias.   The Author Guide is now available online at animalmethodsbias.org! Check it out and share it with your colleagues and trainees.

Thanks, One Green Planet for covering the launch of www.animalmethodsbias.com! As the article notes, with these easily available resources, "researchers can take immediate action to improve their chances of publishing animal-free studies." https://lnkd.in/eWUQAa-d

Despite emerging evidence that non-animal methods can more closely replicate human conditions, animal research remains the norm. In fact, scientists are being asked to conduct animal research, on top of the non-animal research they’ve already conducted, if they want to be published in academic journals. In a recent survey over a third of respondents said that they had been asked by reviewers to conduct animal research that was not part of their original project. One in five respondents had gone on to carry out those additional animal tests to get published. That’s where the Coalition to Illuminate and Address Animal Methods Bias steps in. We’re an international collaboration involving scientists and advocacy groups working together to change the status quo. Our goals are to: - Gather evidence about Animal Methods Bias. - Raise awareness of Animal Methods Bias and its impact on both academic quality and the uptake of new methods. - Provide tools and support to mitigate the effects of this phenomenon. COLAAB's new website is live and packed with resources, including the author's guide for addressing animal method bias.

Join me on December 18th for a webinar about animal methods bias! https://lnkd.in/esyRvGwH Hosted by Kathrin Herrmann, the Animal Protection Commissioner of Berlin, and Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT), the next 3Rs Training Webinar will take place on Wednesday, December 18th, 2024, at 1 pm ET/ 7 pm CET. Animal methods bias is the preference for animal-based research methods or the lack of expertise to adequately evaluate nonanimal methods. Our recent study found that half of researchers surveyed had been asked by reviewers to add an animal experiment to their otherwise animal-free study. These requests and other forms of animal methods bias can affect the quality or fairness of nonanimal research assessments, including peer reviews of manuscripts and grant applications, potentially causing delays in publication, lower-impact papers, or rejected grants. The Coalition to Illuminate and Address Animal Methods Bias (COLAAB) is an international, cross-sector collaboration of researchers and advocates aimed at addressing this issue. The COLAAB does this in two main ways, by gathering empirical evidence of animal methods bias and developing strategies to mitigate its harmful effects. This presentation will provide an overview of animal methods bias and ongoing work of the COLAAB, including the latest evidence and a new online tool authors can use to help prevent and address animal methods bias when publishing studies. AnimalMethodsBias.org contains guidance, a database of animal-free experimental resources, a library of over 800 papers and other references, and more. I hope you will join us!

📚✍️ ¡No te pierdas nuestra conferencia con Bianca Marigliani sobre cómo abordar el sesgo en los métodos relacionados con animales en la publicación científica! 🐾🌍 Aprende a garantizar que las investigaciones se realicen con los más altos estándares de bienestar animal y ética. Descubre cómo evitar sesgos en la presentación de métodos y contribuir a una ciencia más responsable y consciente que promueva la integridad de los animales. ¡Únete a la conversación! 👉 https://lnkd.in/eHwcFFFw #BienestarAnimal #ÉticaCientífica #PublicaciónResponsable #Colama #Acicba #Accbal