Abstract:Animals play a key role in biomedical research and other areas of scientific inquiry. But public opinion plays a key role in influencing how this area of science is regulated and funded. Nevertheless, scientists have historically been reticent to speak openly about their animal research or to open their animal facilities to the public in any way. Consequently, most of the available information has come from those opposed to animal research. This imbalance has led to suspicion and lagging public support for this work. To reverse this effect, efforts are now being made in many parts of the world to increase openness and transparency in this sector. The authors firmly believe that encouraging more institutions to join this movement, focused on better and greater communication, is essential to preserve the research community's "permission" to perform justifiable studies involving animals. For the purposes of this article, we consider "the public" to include that cross-section of society who may be asked their views in opinion poll studies and who may vote in elections. It also includes other influential groups such as the media, scientists working in other disciplines, animal welfare groups, and politicians who may shape regulatory frameworks. Public opinion on this issue matters. The majority of funding for biomedical research comes, either directly or indirectly, from the public purse. In the case of pharmaceutical research, funding derives from selling medicines to consumers. We therefore all have a vested interest in this funding. Furthermore, legislation that covers the use of animals in research is permissive-it allows scientists to do things that might otherwise contravene animal welfare laws. But this permission is normally contingent on complying with strict protective measures designed to ensure the work stays within the ethical framework that public opinion has deemed appropriate. Open and transparent communication is the best way to promote public understanding. There is thus a responsibility on all those involved in animal research, whether scientists, animal care staff, physicians, veterinarians, members of ethics committees, or managers and leaders, to support and promote public awareness and trust in this work. Circumstantial evidence shows that, with such open dialogue, there is decreased targeting and harassment of individuals and job pride and satisfaction for all involved is improved.

Data sharing and re‐use as a moral imperative in animal research

Sharing Neurophysiology Data from the Allen Brain Observatory: Lessons Learned

Sharing Neuron Data: Carrots, Sticks, and Digital Records

Data Sharing: Convert Challenges into Opportunities

Sharing Begins at Home

Interdisciplinary Animal Research Ethics-Challenges, Opportunities, and Perspectives

Use and Reuse of Animal Behavioral, Molecular, and Biochemical Data in Alzheimer's Disease Research: Focus on 3Rs and Saving People's Tax Dollars

What Drives Academic Data Sharing?

Including all voices in international data-sharing governance

Data sharing in neurodegenerative disease research: challenges and learnings from the innovative medicines initiative public-private partnership model

Data availability, reusability, and analytic reproducibility: evaluating the impact of a mandatory open data policy at the journal Cognition

Considering aspects of the 3Rs principles within experimental animal biology

The past, present and future of neuroscience data sharing: a perspective on the state of practices and infrastructure for FAIR

Communicating About Animal Research with the Public

Animals, quality and the pursuit of relevance

Reflection over compliance: Critiquing mandatory data sharing policies for qualitative research

Reusing Data Technical and Ethical Challenges

The spectrum of data sharing policies in neuroimaging data repositories

From Data Creator to Data Reuser: Distance Matters

Openness and transparency in animal research: Why and how

Why It Takes a Village to Manage and Share Data