ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2023
Time to consider animal data governance: perspectives from neuroscience.
Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Host-Microbe Interactions: Prospects of Machine Learning and Deep Learning Technologies in Animal Viral Disease Management.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
- FAIR African brain data: challenges and opportunities.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Scientific research relies mainly on multimodal, multidimensional big data generated from both animal and human organisms as well as technical data. However, unlike human data that is increasingly regulated at national, regional and international levels, regulatory frameworks that can govern the sharing and reuse of non-human animal data are yet to be established. Whereas the legal and ethical principles that shape animal data generation in many countries and regions differ, the generated data are shared beyond boundaries without any governance mechanism. This paper, through perspectives from neuroscience, shows conceptually and empirically that there is a need for animal data governance that is informed by ethical concerns. There is a plurality of ethical views on the use of animals in scientific research that data governance mechanisms need to consider. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were used for data collection. Overall, 13 interviews with 12 participants (10 males and 2 females) were conducted. The interviews were transcribed and stored in NviVo 12 where they were thematically analyzed. Results: The participants shared the view that it is time to consider animal data governance due to factors such as differences in regulations, differences in ethical principles, values and beliefs and data quality concerns. They also provided insights on possible approaches to governance. Discussion: We therefore conclude that a procedural approach to data governance is needed: an approach that does not prescribe a particular ethical position but allows for a quick understanding of ethical concerns and debate about how different positions differ to facilitate cross-cultural and international collaboration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.