Page 0037

37

What lay members should expect

Everyone involved needs to have a clear idea of what the retrospective review process is intended to achieve, the

issues that are to be considered, the questions that need to be addressed and any actions that should be taken

forward (see Jennings et al. 2007 for further discussion).

The process should be designed to enable lay and other ERB participants to gain a clear sense of the scientific

outcomes of the project and its effects on the animals to date, and you should feel able to ask any question you

think is important, and which might help in achieving the benefits listed above.

The box overleaf lists some points for consideration during retrospective review - but note that not every topic will

be relevant for every project.

Benefits of retrospective review

Examining harms and benefits and informing future work, by:

 providing feedback to the ERB on progress with the project, its achievements, the impact of any

amendments, and any problems or difficulties

 comparing the actual harms and benefits of the work with those predicted at the application stage, in order

to inform future judgements.

Enhancing implementation of the 3Rs, by:

 identifying any 3Rs advances made during the project, and helping to ensure that they are implemented in

the institution wherever possible and publicised more widely

 bringing together a range of expertise to provide advice and assistance to research teams, to help in:

 addressing any technical or scientific difficulties not yet resolved

 raising awareness of any steps that can be taken to implement the 3Rs more fully.

Optimising project management, by:

 identifying and addressing any concerns about project or animal facility management, including resources,

staffing, training requirements, communication and dissemination of information

 planning ahead, e.g. for authorisation of future work and/or amendments to on-going work.

Assisting with collection and reporting of data on the actual severity of adverse effects, and:

 using these data to help identify priority areas for further application of the 3Rs (see Chapter 4, page 30 for

discussion of severity classification and reporting).

At the end of the process, you should feel confident that:

 any emerging ethical issues have been recognised and will be addressed

 all possibilities for further implementation of the 3Rs will be taken forward

 the process has helped to optimise project management, and address any difficulties or concerns

 developments in the 3Rs and/or any other lessons learned will be shared with others in the

institution and/or more widely, so that they can inform future work

 the benefits of the retrospective review match the efforts put into it.

Index

  1. Page 0001
  2. Page 0002
  3. Page 0003
  4. Page 0004
  5. Page 0005
  6. Page 0006
  7. Page 0007
  8. Page 0008
  9. Page 0009
  10. Page 0010
  11. Page 0011
  12. Page 0012
  13. Page 0013
  14. Page 0014
  15. Page 0015
  16. Page 0016
  17. Page 0017
  18. Page 0018
  19. Page 0019
  20. Page 0020
  21. Page 0021
  22. Page 0022
  23. Page 0023
  24. Page 0024
  25. Page 0025
  26. Page 0026
  27. Page 0027
  28. Page 0028
  29. Page 0029
  30. Page 0030
  31. Page 0031
  32. Page 0032
  33. Page 0033
  34. Page 0034
  35. Page 0035
  36. Page 0036
  37. Page 0037
  38. Page 0038
  39. Page 0039
  40. Page 0040
  41. Page 0041
  42. Page 0042
  43. Page 0043
  44. Page 0044
  45. Page 0045
  46. Page 0046
  47. Page 0047
  48. Page 0048
  49. Page 0049
  50. Page 0050
  51. Page 0051
  52. Page 0052
  53. Page 0053
  54. Page 0054
  55. Page 0055
  56. Page 0056
  57. Page 0057
  58. Page 0058
  59. Page 0059
  60. Page 0060
  61. Page 0061
  62. Page 0062
  63. Page 0063
  64. Page 0064

powered by PageTiger