title: Prior ethical review of animal versus human subjects research.
abstract: During the last decade the animal rights movement has garnered widespread support that now threatens the existence of animal research. Current public sentiment demands researcher accountability and documentation of the potential value of animal research that was largely assumed in the past. One way this can be accomplished is through prior review and approval of animal research protocols by the federally mandated institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC). IACUCs, however, face more difficulty in arriving at consistent and ethically correct decisions than human subject review committees or institutional review boards (IRBs). This article explains why and draws a comparison between animal and human subjects review.
authors.affiliation: University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68105.
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Prentice
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Jameton
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Antonson
authors.forename: I
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Zucker
mesh_terms: D035661:Animal Care Committees; D032761:Animal Experimentation; D000827:Animal Welfare; D000818:Animals; D026724:Ethical Review; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D006805:Human Experimentation; D006801:Humans; D011367:Professional Staff Committees; D013315:Stress, Psychological