The impact of introducing computer-based alternatives to the use of animals in the teaching of physiology and pharmacology at balkan universities - A pilot study

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals

Volumn 37, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 547-556

  Kojic, Zvezdana Z ^a   Dewhurst, David G ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE   (Serbia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Alternatives; Animal use; Computer assisted learning; Pharmacology education; Physiology education

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVE; ANIMAL TESTING REDUCTION; ARTICLE; CAT; COMPUTER MODEL; CURRICULUM; DOG; FROG; GUINEA PIG; HUMAN; LEARNING STYLE; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PILOT STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RABBIT; RAT; TEACHING; UNIVERSITY; EASTERN EUROPE; ECONOMICS; EDUCATION; METHODOLOGY; PHARMACOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE;

AMPHIBIA; ANIMALIA; MAMMALIA;

ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVES; COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION; EUROPE, EASTERN; HUMANS; PHARMACOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PILOT PROJECTS; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 77949895396     PISSN: 02611929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026119290903700511     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Casati, S. & Hartung, T. (2003). Third report of the EU on experimental animal numbers. ALTEX 20, 93.
2. Grindon, C. (2005). The fourth EC report on laboratory animal use - is it sufficiently revealing? ATLA 33, 1-2.
3. Sauer, U.G., Spielmann, H. & Rusche, B. (2005). Fourth EU Report on the statistics on the number of animals used for scientific purposes in 2002 - trends, problems, conclusions. ALTEX 22, 59-67.
4. Gruber, F.P. & Dewhurst, D.G. (2004). Alternatives to animal experimentation in biomedical education. ALTEX 21, 33-48.
5. Leathard, H.L. & Dewhurst, D.G. (1995). Comparison of the cost-effectiveness of a computer assisted learning program with a tutored demonstration to teach intestinal motility to medical students. Association for Learning Technology 3, 118-125.
6. Fawver, A.L., Branch, C.E., Trentham, L., Robertson, B.T. & Beckett, S.D. (1990). A comparison of interactive videodisc instruction with live animal laboratories. American Journal of Physiology 259 (Advances in Physiology Education 4), S11-14.
7. Dewhurst, D.G., Hardcastle, J., Hardcastle, P.T. & Stuart, E. (1994). Comparison of a computer simulation program and a traditional laboratory practical class for teaching the principles of intestinal absorption. American Journal of Physiology 267 (6 Pt 3), 95-104.
8. Jukes, N. & Martinsen, S. (2006). The InterNICHE policy on the use of animals and alternatives in education. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 58-62.
9. Jukes, N. (2006). Internationalising alternatives in higher education. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 63-67.
10. van der Valk, J. (2006). Educating scientists on alternatives. A continuous process. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 81-84.
11. Ruksenas, O. (2006). Animals and alternatives in biomedical education in the Baltics. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 78-80.
12. Cervinka, M., Rudolf, E. & Cervinkova, Z. (2006). Alternatives to animal experimentation in undergraduate curricula at medical schools - analysis of current trends in the Czech Republic. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 46-50.
13. Jukes, N. (2008). Russia: update on animal experiments and alternatives in education. ALTEX 25, 56-62.
14. Sladowski, D. & Halder, M. (2002). ECVAM's activities in the EU candidate countries. ATLA 30, 203-205.
15. Jukes, N. (2006). UK/EU: alternatives progress in Russia and Ukraine. ALTEX 23, 223-225.
16. Sheffield BioScience Programs. Edinburgh, UK: D. Dewhurst. Available at: www.sheffbp.co.uk (Accessed 28.09.09).
17. Markham, T., Jones, S.J., Hughes, I. & Sutcliffe, M. (1998). Survey of methods of teaching and learning in undergraduate pharmacology within the UK higher education. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 19, 257-262.
18. Hughes, I.E. (2001). Do computer simulations of laboratory practicals meet learning needs? Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 22, 71-74.
19. Dewhurst, D. (2007). Is it possible to meet the learning objectives of undergraduate pharmacology classes with non-animal models? Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Alternatives & Animal Use in the Life Sciences, August 21-25, 2007, Tokyo, Japan. AATEX 14, Special Issue, 207-212.
20. Clarke, K. (1987). The use of microcomputer simulations in undergraduate neurophysiology experiments. ATLA 14, 134-140.
21. Dewhurst, D.G., Brown, G.J. & Meehan, A.S. (1988). Microcomputer simulations of laboratory experiments in physiology. ATLA 15, 280-289.
22. Dewhurst, D. & Jenkinson, L. (1995). The impact of computer-based alternatives on the use of animals in undergraduate teaching: a pilot study. ATLA 23, 521-530.
23. Guy, J. & Frisby, A. (1992). Using interactive video-discs to teach gross anatomy to undergraduates at the Ohio State University. Academic Medicine 67, 132-133.
24. Kinzie, M.B., Strauss, R. & Foss, J. (1993). The effects of an interactive simulation on the performance and achievement of high school biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30, 989-1000.
25. Knight, A. (2007) The effectiveness of humane teaching methods in veterinary education. ALTEX 24, 91-109.
26. Hollingsworth, M., Hughes, I. & Dewhurst, D.G. (1999). Implementing technology-based teaching and learning in pharmacology. British Journal of Pharmacology Supplement 128, 303.
27. Hollingsworth, M., Dewhurst, D.G., Kelly, M.E. & Norris, T.M. (2001). Teaching & learning resource pack on the drug targets and G-protein coupled receptors as drug targets computer assisted learning packages. Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology Abstracts of the 3rd Meeting of the Federation of the European Pharmacological Societies (EPHAR) 15, 1, 26, 9PO22.
28. Norris, T.M. & Dewhurst, D.G. (2002). A multi-site evaluation of a project to implement CAL in undergraduate pharmacology teaching. British Journal of Pharmacology Supplement 135, 150.