Non-ASPA research

• School ethics committees and non-ASPA approval

  Researchers in the Schools of Biology, Psychology and Neuroscience or Medicine should submit their non-ASPA animal research proposals to the relevant School ethics committee:

  Biology (bioethics@st-andrews.ac.uk)
  Psychology and Neuroscience (psyethics@st-andrews.ac.uk)
  Medicine (medethic@st-andrews.ac.uk)  

  Submissions from researchers in other schools will be forwarded to either the Biology or Psychology and Neuroscience ethics committees depending on which is the most appropriate for the proposal. Researchers  should liaise or submit the completed application form to the Home Office liaison contact (holo@st-andrews.ac.uk) in the first instance.

  In all cases, copies of documentation should be appended to the proposal, showing that licences, permits to work, and a memorandum of understanding (or equivalent) have been obtained.

  When applying, you should review the guidelines for the treatment of animals in behavioural research and teaching and ensure you are familiar with the concepts raised.

• Changes to non-ASPA research

  If your research plans change, you should submit a project change form to your School ethics committee. As part of the project change form, you are required to summarise the changes to your research. You should submit the proposed amendments along with the original animal ethics form to your relevant School ethics committee.

• Secondary data process

  Using secondary data can be a good alternative to collecting data directly from animals (primary data), removing the need for contact. This guidance covers some of the ethical issues relating to use of secondary data and how this impacts the ethical application process. 

  Secondary data relating to animals often requires ethical approval depending on the source and nature of the data. The extent to which the ethical review application form must be completed also depends on the source and nature of the data. However, ethical review and approval may not required for secondary data in certain circumstances.

  Researchers completing work on secondary data must obtain ethical permission in advance of this research from their School ethics committee.  Researchers are required to complete a Secondary data source application form.

  A dataset is considered ‘secondary data’ when the individual using (accessing and analysing) the data had no meaningful involvement in the collection of the data.  For example the researcher did not design the methodology or collect the data.  

  To obtain ethical approval for accessing and analysing secondary data, the applicant must declare that the collection of the data was undertaken:

  • in as humane and painless a manner as possible

  • in accordance with any applicable laws

  • with appropriate precautions in place to minimise interference, risk, or adverse consequences to the animals or the ecosystems of which they are part

  • if involving endangered or CITES (I, II or III) listed species, that the data collection could not be undertaken with a species not listed by CITES

  Animal material/tissue sourced from others is not ‘secondary data’, and requires the completion of the full animal ethics form. 

   

• When the non-ASPA process is not required

  The animal ethics process aims to provide guidance to academics and protect the welfare of animals.

  The non-ASPA ethics approval process is not required for:

  • research involving humans
  • projects involving invertebrates other than cephalopods
  • projects requiring a Home Office licence.

  Alternative processes may be required.

  The secondary data process is NOT required when:

  • The data collected was part of a project that received prior ethical approval from the University of St Andrews’ AWEC.
  • The data that was deposited alongside a peer-reviewed publication.
  • The data was made available openly and publicly with no form of payment, registration, permission, or application being required to access the data.

  However, if you have reason to believe that the source might be considered inappropriate by others (for example, if you have reason to believe the data might have been obtained illegally, unethically or ‘leaked’), please discuss with your School Ethics Committee.  If there are additional ethical issues then an ethical review application may be required. Researchers should discuss this with their School ethics committee (SEC).