Abstract
The factors which need to be taken into account in designing a 'good' experiment are reviewed. Such an experiment should be unbiased, have high precision, a wide range of applicability, it should be simple, and there should be a means of quantifying uncertainty (Cox 1958). The relative precision due to the use of randomized block designs was found to range from 96% to 543% in 5 experiments involving 30 variables. However, a survey of 78 papers published in two toxicology journals showed that such designs were hardly used. Similarly, designs in which more than one factor was varied simultaneously ('factorial designs') were only used in 9% of studies, though interactions between variables such as dose and strain of animal may be common, so that single factor experiments could be misleading.
The consequences of increased within-group variability due to infection and genetic segregation were quantified using data published by Gärtner (1990). Both substantially reduced precision, but toxicologists continue to use non-isogenic laboratory animals, leading to experiments with a lower level of precision than is necessary.
It is concluded that there is scope for improving the design of animal experiments, which could lead to a reduction in animal use. People using animals should be required to take formal training courses which include sessions on experimental design in order to minimize animal use and to increase experimental efficiency.