Whilst each project and each application is unique, certain aspects of the application forms provide common pitfalls for unwary applicants.
These are:
A "layperson" is someone who is not qualified in a given profession, or does not have a specialised or professional knowledge of a certain subject. All Animal Ethics Committees in Australia include lay members who do not have specialised biomedical knowledge or expertise therefore they cannot be expected to understand scientific terms, expressions or jargon.
Lay language (or "everyday language") sections of applications should be written at a level that a Year 10 student could be expected to understand. Scientific terms should not be included unless they're in common, popular use. This means lay language sections will often be less specific than an abstract for a scientific paper would be, but they need to convey adequate information to enable the Committee member to understand the aims of the project and an overview of the procedures.
The table below shows examples of alternative or preferred terminology for use in lay language sections:
| Examples of acceptable lay language | Words to avoid in lay language sections |
| Protein | Receptor |
| Lipid or Fat | Triglyceride |
| Production | Expression |
| Genetically modified | Transgenic, knock-in or knock-out |
| Mouse | Murine |
| In a live animal | in vivo |
| Inhaled anaesthetic | Isoflurane |
Other things to avoid include:
It needs to be clear in each application how animal numbers have been decided and what animals will be used for different parts of the project, especially for complex projects which include a number of different experiments. The use of flow charts and tables to specify animal use are greatly encouraged.
As well as specifying how and where animals will be used, and how many are required for each step of the project, the choice of group sizes must be fully justified. This justification usually comes in the form of a power calculation. If a project includes a number of different experiments, each experiment should have its own power calculation, specific to the parameters of what is being measured.
Each power calculation should include:
A good resource to consult when planning your experiment, and deciding on the number of animals you need, is the ARRIVE Guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments). These can be found at https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/arrive-guidelines
For biostatistical or epidemiological resources and support within UniSA, use the UniSA 'Find a Research Expert' function:
https://www.unisa.edu.au/DORE (in the 'Find a Research Expert' field enter your search term i.e. statistics)
The Animal Ethics Committee has the responsibility of assessing each application with regards to the expected welfare cost to the animals in comparison to the potential benefit of the research. Although the application as a whole is designed to aid in this assessment, the response to the 3Rs question has a significant effect on the Committee's decision.
The following tips should help with understanding the implications of each question, and what to consider when answering this question to ensure the Committee has all the information needed to make a balanced judgment:
1. Ethical Issues - start with the welfare cost to the animal, not the research benefit (i.e. follow the question order). This is your chance to articulate the cost-benefit.
The welfare cost could include:
Then discuss benefits of your research with reference to the cost to the animals. It is useful to quantify the benefits, e.g. the potential beneficial outcomes for individuals or for the environment.
2. Reduction - focus on the experimental design and statistics.
This should include:
3. Refinement - focus on the animal!
This could include:
4. Replacement
This could include:
It's important to address the question of your literature search strategy. Useful resources:
Monitoring Guidelines and Exemplars as recommended by the UniSA Veterinarian may be downloaded from the UniSA AEC webpages (login required).
If you are performing any procedures on animals, even non-invasive ones (e.g. behavioural testing), you must monitor the wellbeing of each animal (unless it's a non-recovery procedure), and this monitoring must be documented by way of a Clinical Record Sheet (CRS).
Each CRS should be designed with specific attention to what the animal will be experiencing and its potential responses to that experience - you may start with a generic/standard CRS, but it should be personalised appropriately for each study.
Things to include in and clearly state on the CRS are:
*Please refer to the Monitoring Guidelines for advice on appropriate humane endpoints.
Be careful to ensure that the intervention and end-points shown on the CRS match those stated in the application form!
Note: Where once-daily monitoring is to be done, it should be carried out between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., and as close to 24-hourly as is practicable.