What is it about?
Have you ever cited the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights in your research? If you have, you could be doing it wrong... Our research, peer-reviewed by 7 (!) academics, screened 305 scientific publications and found that 48% contained erroneous or misleading claims about the UDAR. Additionally, 57% of the 103 ethics statements that mentioned the UDAR included misleading claims.
Featured Image
Photo by Nikolett Emmert on Unsplash
Why is it important?
The UDAR is often cited without the necessary rigor to allow correct interpretation by readers. These errors provide a false sense of legitimacy and moral compass, especially when justifying the ethical use of animals in research. Our results highlight the need for increased awareness and scrutiny in the peer-review process and call for further research on citation practices, particularly concerning research ethics and animal protection.
Perspectives
It was unexpected to see the article reviewed by seven experts. However, this extensive evaluation ultimately provided reassurance that our work on such a sensitive topic was as robust and well-substantiated as possible.
Alexandre Azevedo
Escola Universitaria Vasco da Gama
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The inaccurate citation of the “Universal Declaration of Animal Rights” (UDAR) in the scientific literature: a scoping review, BMC Veterinary Research, February 2025, Springer Science + Business Media,
DOI: 10.1186/s12917-025-04470-z.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
