MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W156932657

The CALAM/ACMAL standards of veterinary care and laboratory animal welfare.

2008· article· en· W156932657 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patricia V. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal welfareGovernment (linguistics)Veterinary medicineProfessional associationAnimal testingMedical educationMedicinePolitical sciencePublic relationsBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Association for Laboratory Animal Medicine/L’association canadienne de la medecine des animaux de laboratoire (CALAM/ACMAL) is the professional organization for laboratory animal veterinarians working to support the humane care and use of animals used in research, teaching, and testing across all sectors in Canada. The mission of CALAM/ACMAL is to advise interested parties on all matters pertaining to laboratory animal medicine, to further the education of its members, to promote ethics and professionalism in the field, and to actively encourage student interest in laboratory animal medicine. The organization is over 25 years old and works closely with a number of government and nongovernmental organizations to promote research animal welfare. One of the central documents produced by CALAM/ACMAL is the Standards of Veterinary Care. First drafted in 1989, this guide has been revised twice, once in 2004 and more recently in 2007. An essential component emphasized throughout the document is that CALAM/ACMAL believes that both the Association and its individual members have a responsibility to provide leadership in the development of best practices for the humane care and use of animals in research, teaching, testing and production, with due consideration of the 3 Rs: replacement of animals used, when possible; reduction of numbers of animals used; and refinement of techniques and procedures employed. When applying the 3 Rs, CALAM/ACMAL supports the principle that elimination of pain and distress through refinement should be given more weight than reduction in the number of animals used. The CALAM/ACMAL Standards of Veterinary Care is also used as a template by peer review panelists to define the adequacy of the veterinary care portion of the animal care and use program, when institutions are being assessed for compliance by the Canadian Council on Animal Care. The CALAM/ACMAL recognizes that the well-being and welfare of animals used in research, teaching, and testing are the main focus for all the laboratory animal veterinarian’s roles and responsibilities. These include responsibility for promoting and monitoring an animal’s welfare before, during, and after its use. Animal welfare includes physical and behavioral aspects of an animal’s condition, evaluated in terms of environmental comfort, freedom from pain and distress, and provision of appropriate social interactions, both with members of the same species and with humans. The laboratory animal veterinarian is responsible for making determinations concerning animal welfare, in collaboration with the animal care committee, animal caregivers, and animal users. This is a critical point, because the veterinarian’s authority within the institution must be sufficient to meet this responsibility and to ensure that all projects using animals receive institutional review and approval. While the number of animals housed or used may influence the type and extent of veterinary programs, the actual number of animals does not influence the application of the standards. In terms of veterinary care, the expectation is that every animal must be treated with the same ethical consideration and high standards of veterinary care, and must have equal access to appropriate conditions that meet its physical and behavioral needs. In its most recent form, the CALAM/ACMAL Standards of Veterinary Care sets forth expectations for current Canadian veterinary licensure, the need for specific training in the field and for ongoing continuing education, and the types of appropriate institutional reporting relationships that avoid conflicts, in addition to specifying the comprehensive responsibilities of the laboratory animal veterinarian. These responsibilities have been revised in the most recent version in recognition of the increasing complexity of the role, the increasing regulatory oversight of research institutions, and the changing public expectations for oversight of research animal care and use. The responsibilities discussed in detail in the document include: 1) Animal Welfare; 2) Appropriate Use of Animals in Research, Teaching, and Testing; 3) Health Management, and Disease Detection and Surveillance; 4) Handling and Restraint, Sedation, Anesthesia and Analgesia, and Methods of Euthanasia; 5) Surgical and Perioperative Care; and 6) Other Responsibilities (education and training of animal users; occupational health and safety awareness; awareness of zoonoses; chemical, radiation, and biohazard knowledge; and crisis management). The document is comprehensive, but not proscriptive, and is intended to be used as a tool for veterinarians and institutions to ensure the quality of their veterinary care program. While long considered a nontraditional area of practice, laboratory animal medicine is a growing specialty in Canada and the USA. Interested practitioners should be aware of critical responsibility of the laboratory animal veterinarian in promoting animal welfare, as outlined in the CALAM/ACMAL Standards of Veterinary Care, when considering opportunities in this field. The document may be found in its entirety at: http://www.uwo.ca/animal/website/CALAM/Content/StandardsVetCare.pdf.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207