Workshop "Improving the quality and reproducibility of both NAMs and in vivo studies" in Porto, Portugal

This training event, organised by Nuno Franco, brought together researchers, trainers, veterinarians, and professionals involved in laboratory animal science, NAMs, animal research, and the 3Rs.

The workshop addressed a central challenge in contemporary biomedical science: improving the reliability, ethical robustness, and translational value of both animal and non-animal research. Rather than presenting NAMs and animal studies as opposing approaches, the programme treated them as complementary areas facing partly shared methodological challenges, including study design, validation, preregistration, reporting quality, training, oversight, and the responsible use of biological materials.

The programme combined lectures in the morning with hands-on and group-based activities in the afternoon.

Day 1 opened with a welcome session and an introduction to participants’ backgrounds, followed by a presentation on current reproducibility challenges in animal and non-animal research, by Nuno Franco. Subsequent sessions addressed education and training for improving animal studies, ethics, and the 3Rs (Anna Olsson), the use of animal-derived reagents in in vitro research and available alternatives (Jeffrey Bajramovic); and the preregistration of in vitro and animal studies (Céline Heinl).

Day 2 focused on validation and GIVIMP (Susanne Kolle), searching for alternative methods (Bettina Bert), improving the design of animal and non-animal studies (Nuno Franco), and the role of research support infrastructures in improving animal study quality and implementation of the 3Rs (Sofia Lamas and Sara Capas).

A distinctive feature of the workshop was its emphasis on active learning, through the practical sessions carried out in the afternoons by the morning speakers (plus Julio Borlido Santos and Andreia Costa, who partnered with Anna Olsson), with trainees rotating across different hands-on activities.

Afternoon sessions included practical exercises on preregistration, literature search, sample size calculation for different designs, research screening, education and training, and the role of support infrastructures. One particularly well-received element was an escape-room activity (led by J. Bajramovic) linked to replacing animal-derived products used in NAM  research, which helped participants engage with the ethical and scientific implications of materials such as foetal calf serum and basement membrane extracts. The practical format encouraged discussion between participants from different disciplinary backgrounds and allowed trainees to connect general principles of reproducibility and the 3Rs with concrete research decisions.

The workshop highlighted that “non-animal” methods are not automatically animal-free, ethically unproblematic, or more methodologically robust. Discussions on animal-derived reagents, validation, and GIVIMP illustrated that NAMs require the same level of critical scrutiny as animal studies. At the same time, sessions on experimental design, training, competence, and research infrastructure reinforced that improving animal research remains essential where animal studies continue to be scientifically and ethically justified, and that if NAMs are to replace animal use, their use must be validated and follow high methodological standards.

The workshop also proved to be a valuable training and networking opportunity, with relevance to the future implementation of 3Rs-oriented, reproducible biomedical research. Informal feedback shared by participants both in loco and later on social media, was very positive. Participants valued the balanced treatment of animal and non-animal research, the combination of conceptual and practical sessions, and the opportunity to discuss reproducibility and 3Rs implementation across disciplinary boundaries.

Overall, the workshop contributed to the objectives of IMPROVE by promoting a more integrated understanding of how 3Rs principles, rigorous methodology, preregistration, validation, and research support infrastructures can improve biomedical science, having as a main strength the refusal to frame NAMs and animal studies as competing moral or scientific categories. Instead, the workshop emphasised that both require careful design, transparent reporting, appropriate validation, competent oversight, and a strong culture of research quality. This balanced approach is likely to be especially useful for researchers and trainers working at the interface between animal research, NAM development, and biomedical reproducibility.