Editor Interventions

The Mitigation Working Group of the COLAAB is investigating ways to improve fairness in the review of nonanimal biomedical research studies. In Phase 1 of this initiative (November 2024), we contacted editors and publishers of scientific journals to gather feedback on potential bias mitigation interventions. The goal of this outreach was to adjust and prioritize interventions according to their feasibility, cost, and impact. In Phase 2 of this initiative, launching in November 2025, we are disseminating our recommendations, a set of cost-effective, impactful editor interventions to help mitigate animal methods bias.

Recommendations

While there are several ways to reduce animal methods bias, editor intervention stands out as both highly actionable and influential. Editors have direct oversight of the review process and can ensure that reviewer feedback remains evidence-based and fair. Simple editor intervention can facilitate faster, more objective publication decisions without requiring major structural changes to publishing processes. Interventions during manuscript review are those simplest to implement and the COLAAB's highest priorities.

During manuscript review:

  1. Watch for reviewer comments asking for animal experiments to be added to nonanimal studies.
  2. Consider whether such experiments are feasible in terms of cost and time.
  3. Ensure reviewer concerns about NAMs are backed by substantive, referenced reasoning, not just a personal preference for animal models.
  4. Remove unsupported requests from reviews or advise authors to disregard them when appropriate.
  5. Encourage reviewers to evaluate NAMs based on scientific quality, relevance to the research question, and adherence to current best practices—not on personal preferences or perceived hierarchies.

If You Lack NAMs Expertise:

  1. Ask reviewers who did not request animal studies to provide their opinion on the necessity of the request.
  2. Seek additional review from someone with expertise in appropriate nonanimal methods.

Proactive Editorial Policies:

  1. Ensure selected reviewers have the methodological expertise to evaluate NAMs-based research fairly.
  2. Include editors with NAMs expertise on your editorial board and engaged them when reviewer concerns arise.

Download our Editor Checklist!