Welcome to the SYSTRAM FUND
A fund has been launched by the charity SABRE Research UK to provide research grants for systematic reviews of animal studies.
Systematic reviews are scientific research articles which identify relevant studies, appraise their quality and summarise their results using scientific methodology regarding a specific research question. They are regarded by the scientific community as the best available method for assessing most research. The results of animal experiments are published in medical and scientific journals and in order to make sense of the published data systematic reviews are needed to evaluate them. However, this is not common practice and systematic reviews of animal studies are rare in comparison to those of clinical studies. Systematic reviews would help improve the quality of evidence derived from animal experiments and achieve a more reliable interpretation of their relevance to clinical trials. They would gather evidence that could be used to assess and monitor the translation of animal research to the promotion of human health.
The importance of using systematic reviews of animal studies in the evaluation of animal research was first discussed in a commentary in the Lancet in 2002 (1) and the concept further developed in an Education & Debate paper in the BMJ in 2004 (2). Then in 2005 a report following an inquiry by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics recommended that funding should be sought from the major funders of research to carry out systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies.(3)
Visitors can view the FUND STATUS page to see the general progress of the fund and how the sources of contributions and donations are apportioned. For further background information please visit SABRE Research UK (see link on menu). If you wish to donate either as an individual or as an organization please use the DONATE to FUND page. All donations go directly into the fund and none are allocated to the charity, administration, salaries or any other purpose. Funding will not be granted for basic research, laboratory research or any other research. Contributions are welcomed from the major funders of animal research, the pharmaceutical industry, animal protection groups and other sources of funding as well as donations from the public. Strictly no influences are accepted from donor sources.
(1) Sandercock P, Roberts I. Systematic reviews of animal experiments. Lancet. 2002 24;360(9333):586
(2) Pound P, et al. Where’s the evidence that animal research benefits humans? BMJ 2004;328;514-517
(3) Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2005) The ethics of research involving animals. Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London.
'...... commercial priorities are not the only perverse influences on patterns of biomedical research that disregard the interests of patients. Many people within universities and research funding organisations believe that improvements in health are most likely to stem from attempts to unravel basic mechanisms of disease. So, they do research in laboratories and with animals. Although such basic research is unquestionably needed, there is precious little evidence to support this bias towards it. 92, 93 Yet the consequence has been a massive outpouring of laboratory research that has not been properly evaluated to see how relevant it is to patients.' 'Testing Treatments: better research for better healthcare', 2010.
You are viewing the text version of this site.
To view the full version please install the Adobe Flash Player and ensure your web browser has JavaScript enabled.
Need help? check the requirements page.
