{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,18]],"date-time":"2026-08-18T02:50:09Z","timestamp":1787021409584,"version":"build-2736575974"},"reference-count":14,"publisher":"F1000 Research Ltd","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,27]],"date-time":"2026-04-27T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1777248000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"funder":[{"name":"Wellcome","award":["318818\/Z\/24\/Z"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["318818\/Z\/24\/Z"]}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["wellcomeopenresearch.org"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Wellcome Open Res"],"abstract":"<ns5:p>Background Animal Technologists (ATs) are vital in the scientific community, offering crucial expertise in animal care, welfare, and experimental procedures. As projects become more complex, there is an increasing opportunity for ATs to engage actively in scientific projects, decision-making, and collaborative research processes. Unfortunately, many ATs may feel that their professional background is insufficient or may not consistently recognise the significant scientific value of their daily activities. These perceptions can result in missed opportunities for personal and professional growth, and for advancing Refinement and Reduction initiatives within and outside their establishments. Methods In developing the resource, we took into account commonly reported barriers to ATs engagement in scientific communication and collaboration, including perceptions of role boundaries and confidence in interactions with researchers and management. We describe the development of a practical resource designed to support ATs\u2019 self-awareness, confidence, and engagement in scientific discussions by helping them articulate their expertise clearly and effectively. The resources were evaluated during \u201cTell Your Story\u201d workshops. Results Feedback from the workshops was consistently positive. Participants reported increased confidence in recognising and communicating the scientific value of their work, as well as improved engagement in scientific discussions and collaboration. Conclusions By integrating an understanding of the challenges with practical tools and clear strategies, ATs can fully adopt their roles as knowledgeable scientific contributors and welfare advocates. This enables ATs to confidently share their expertise, advance their careers, enhance research quality and reproducibility, support the 3Rs principles, and strengthen the culture of care within a more collaborative and inclusive scientific research environment.<\/ns5:p>","DOI":"10.12688\/wellcomeopenres.25958.1","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,27]],"date-time":"2026-04-27T08:54:07Z","timestamp":1777280047000},"page":"243","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.12688\/wellcomeopenres.crossmark-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Tell Your Story: Strengthening Scientific Engagement and Welfare Leadership among Animal Technologists"],"prefix":"10.12688","volume":"11","author":[{"given":"Sian","family":"Murphy","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Neurobiological Research Facility London W1T 4JG Sainsbury Wellcome Centre, University College London"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-0244-9381","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Christophe","family":"Galichet","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Neurobiological Research Facility London W1T 4JG Sainsbury Wellcome Centre, University College London"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"James","family":"Baker","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Neurobiological Research Facility London W1T 4JG Sainsbury Wellcome Centre, University College London"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Luke","family":"O'Hara","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Neurobiological Research Facility London W1T 4JG Sainsbury Wellcome Centre, University College London"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-8846-9043","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Jordi","family":"L-Tremoleda","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Blizard Institute\/Biological Services London Queen Mary University of London"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0002-7288-3896","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Eleni M","family":"Amaniti","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Neurobiological Research Facility London W1T 4JG Sainsbury Wellcome Centre, University College London"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"2560","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,27]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"694-722","DOI":"10.1177\/0162243917718066","article-title":"Exploring the Role of Animal Technologists in Implementing the 3Rs: An Ethnographic Investigation of the UK University Sector.","volume":"43","author":"B Greenhough","year":"2018","journal-title":"Sci Technol Human Values."},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"18","DOI":"10.1186\/s42826-021-00098-w","article-title":"Working with laboratory rodents in Spain: a survey on welfare and wellbeing.","volume":"37","author":"O Goni-Balentziaga","year":"2021","journal-title":"Lab Anim Res."},{"key":"ref3","article-title":"Tech3Rs Newsletter \u2013 Issue 15: Reader Survey Results.","year":"2022"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"326-333","DOI":"10.1177\/02611929241286024","article-title":"Introducing the COST Action 'Improving the Quality of Biomedical Science with 3Rs Concepts' (IMPROVE).","volume":"52","author":"M Kitsara","year":"2024","journal-title":"Altern Lab Anim."},{"key":"ref5","article-title":"Tell Your Story: Strengthening Scientific Engagement and Welfare Leadership among Animal Technologists University College London. Collection.","author":"S Murphy","year":"2026"},{"key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"499-511","DOI":"10.1136\/medhum-2019-011778","article-title":"Animal research nexus: a new approach to the connections between science, health and animal welfare.","volume":"46","author":"G Davies","year":"2020","journal-title":"Med Humanit."},{"key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e02097","DOI":"10.1016\/j.heliyon.2019.e02097","article-title":"Assessing the safety and suitability of nesting material for singly housed mice with surgically fitted head plates.","volume":"5","author":"Z Windsor","year":"2019","journal-title":"Heliyon."},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"588-592","DOI":"10.1177\/00236772251333986","article-title":"A customised combination of environmental enrichment reduces aggression in CD-1 male mice.","volume":"59","author":"A Veness","year":"2025","journal-title":"Lab Anim."},{"key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"573106","DOI":"10.3389\/fvets.2020.573106","article-title":"Strengthening Workplace Well-Being in Research Animal Facilities.","volume":"7","author":"J Murray","year":"2020","journal-title":"Front Vet Sci."},{"key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"511-518","DOI":"10.1177\/00236772221102238","article-title":"Culture of care in animal research - Expanding the 3Rs to include people.","volume":"56","author":"F Ferrara","year":"2022","journal-title":"Lab Anim."},{"key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e0331675","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0331675","article-title":"Fostering culture of care for early career researchers-Building a trustful environment: Insights from a German perspective.","volume":"20","author":"F Gonzalez-Uarquin","year":"2025","journal-title":"PLoS One."},{"key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3-11","DOI":"10.1093\/ilar.48.1.3","article-title":"Establishing a culture of care, conscience, and responsibility: addressing the improvement of scientific discovery and animal welfare through science-based performance standards.","volume":"48","author":"H Klein","year":"2007","journal-title":"Ilar j."},{"key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"23677219887998","DOI":"10.1177\/0023677219887998","article-title":"The European Federation of the Pharmaceutical Industry and Associations' Research and Animal Welfare Group: Assessing and benchmarking 'Culture of Care' in the context of using animals for scientific purpose.","volume":"54","author":"S Robinson","year":"2019","journal-title":"Lab Anim."},{"key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"170-181","DOI":"10.1177\/00236772221127352","article-title":"New perspectives for teaching Culture of Care and their strengths and challenges.","volume":"57","author":"J Tremoleda","year":"2023","journal-title":"Lab Anim."}],"updated-by":[{"DOI":"10.12688\/wellcomeopenres.25958.2","type":"new_version","label":"New version","source":"publisher","updated":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,6]],"date-time":"2026-07-06T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1783296000000}},{"DOI":"10.12688\/wellcomeopenres.25958.3","type":"new_version","label":"New version","source":"publisher","updated":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,10]],"date-time":"2026-08-10T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1786320000000}}],"container-title":["Wellcome Open Research"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1\/xml","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1\/pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1\/iparadigms","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,6]],"date-time":"2026-07-06T09:49:09Z","timestamp":1783331349000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,27]]},"references-count":14,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.12688\/wellcomeopenres.25958.1","relation":{"has-review":[{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.21956\/wellcomeopenres.28570.r154366","asserted-by":"subject"},{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.21956\/wellcomeopenres.28570.r154367","asserted-by":"subject"},{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.21956\/wellcomeopenres.28570.r154367","asserted-by":"object"},{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.21956\/wellcomeopenres.28570.r154366","asserted-by":"object"}],"is-version-of":[{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.12688\/wellcomeopenres.25958.2","asserted-by":"object"},{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.12688\/wellcomeopenres.25958.3","asserted-by":"object"}]},"ISSN":["2398-502X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2398-502X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,27]]},"assertion":[{"value":"Approved with reservations, Approved with reservations","URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1#article-reports","order":0,"name":"referee-status","label":"Referee status","group":{"name":"current-referee-status","label":"Current Referee Status"}},{"value":"10.21956\/wellcomeopenres.28570.r154366, Chenyang Li, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 11 May 2026, version 1, 2 approved with reservations","URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1#referee-response-154366","order":0,"name":"referee-response-154366","label":"Referee Report","group":{"name":"article-reports","label":"Article Reports"}},{"value":"<b>Eleni Amaniti<\/b>; \n<i>Posted: 25 Jun 2026<\/i>; We appreciate the reviewer's thoughtful and constructive feedback.&nbsp; We're glad to hear that the study design was suitable and that the manuscript was well organised and clear.&nbsp; We have responded to each comment below.  \n<b>1.&nbsp; Emphasising the implications of under-recognising Animal Technologists\u2019 scientific contributions<\/b> We agree with the reviewer that this point could be made more explicit.&nbsp; We have strengthened the Introduction to further emphasise how under-recognition of ATs\u2019 scientific contributions may limit the implementation of the 3Rs, reduce opportunities for welfare refinement, and weaken communication between technical and research teams.  \n<b>2.&nbsp; Definition of SWC<\/b> We thank the reviewer for identifying this.&nbsp; We have now written out \u201cSainsbury Wellcome Centre\u201d in full at first mention, followed by the abbreviation \u201cSWC\u201d.  \n<b>3.&nbsp; Figure 1: clarification of Learning Outcomes<\/b> We agree that this requires clarification.&nbsp; We have updated the wording on what we believe is page 8 to match the figure, ensuring consistency with the main text.  \n<b>4.&nbsp; Figure 2: colour contrast and presentation of results<\/b> We thank the reviewer for this helpful suggestion.&nbsp; We have revised the presentation of Figure 2 to improve readability, including the use of higher-contrast colours.  \n<b>5.&nbsp; Statistical rationale for the chi-square goodness-of-fit test<\/b> We agree that the rationale for the expected distribution needed to be clearer.&nbsp; We have revised the Methods (Software &amp; Statistical analysis section) and Figure legend to explain the rationale for using a uniform expected distribution across Likert categories, and to acknowledge the limitations of this assumption in the context of a small pilot study.  \n<b>6.&nbsp; Small sample size and pilot study framing<\/b> We agree with the reviewer.&nbsp; We have revised the Abstract and Discussion to more explicitly describe the work as a pilot study.&nbsp; We have also softened the conclusions to avoid overgeneralisation and to emphasise that the findings should be interpreted as preliminary and hypothesis-generating.  \n<b>7.&nbsp; Institutional-level barriers and practical adoption<\/b> We recognise that institutional barriers are significant challenges.&nbsp; We have expanded the Discussion to explicitly refer to barriers such as management structures, workload pressures, resource allocation, and recognition mechanisms.&nbsp; We have also added more concrete suggestions for how institutions could support adoption, including protected time, technician-led welfare or refinement projects, internal presentation opportunities, and access to relevant training.  \n<b>8.&nbsp; Low-cost and scalable implementation<\/b> We thank the reviewer for this suggestion.&nbsp; We have added further detail on implementation, including an indicative average material cost for the workshop resource packs.&nbsp; We have also added an \u201cImplementation recommendations\u201d subsection to clarify how similar initiatives could be adopted in other institutions, including through modest structural changes such as setting aside time for reflection, supporting poster development, and embedding AT contributions within appraisal and career-development pathways. We hope these revisions have strengthened the manuscript's academic rigour, clarity, and practical applicability.","URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1#referee-comment-6628","order":1,"name":"referee-comment-6628","label":"Referee Comment","group":{"name":"article-reports","label":"Article Reports"}},{"value":"10.21956\/wellcomeopenres.28570.r154367, David Mawufemor Azilagbetor, University of Basel, Basel, 18 Jun 2026, version 1, 2 approved with reservations","URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1#referee-response-154367","order":2,"name":"referee-response-154367","label":"Referee Report","group":{"name":"article-reports","label":"Article Reports"}},{"value":"<b>Eleni Amaniti<\/b>; \n<i>Posted: 25 Jun 2026<\/i>; We thank the reviewer for their thoughtful and constructive comments. &nbsp; We are pleased that the reviewer recognised the significant contribution of this work and the indispensable role of Animal Technologists (ATs) in supporting animal welfare, scientific quality, and the validity of experimental outcomes. &nbsp;We have addressed each point below.  \n<b>1. Clarifying the practical resource as an output of the research<\/b> We agree with the reviewer that the practical resource should be highlighted more clearly as a study output. &nbsp;We have revised the Discussion to clarify that the educational poster\/handout was not intended solely as a guide to poster design, but as a practical communication resource to help ATs structure, articulate, and share their expertise with scientists, managers, Named Persons, and wider research teams. We have also expanded the Discussion to explain how this resource may be used within research facilities, for example, in technician-led welfare or 3Rs projects, internal facility meetings, training sessions, poster events, appraisal discussions, and conversations with researchers about experimental planning, animal welfare, and opportunities for refinement.  \n<b>2. Highlighting the methodological approach as an output<\/b> We agree that the workshop methodology itself represents an important output of the paper. &nbsp;We have revised the Discussion to make it clearer that the workshop format provides a transferable approach that other institutions could adapt to explore ATs\u2019 experiences, barriers, motivations, and opportunities for scientific engagement.  \n<b>3. Explaining how ATs develop technical and scientific expertise<\/b> We agree that the manuscript should more clearly acknowledge how ATs develop the expertise that enables them to contribute meaningfully to scientific discussions. &nbsp;We have revised the Introduction and Discussion to emphasise that ATs develop technical and scientific expertise through formal training in animal technology and laboratory animal science, competency-based institutional training, continuing professional development, regulated training requirements, practical experience, and daily observation of animal health, behaviour, welfare, and experimental outcomes.  \n<b>4. Reporting the number of participating institutions and participant profiles<\/b> We agree that this information improves transparency. &nbsp;We updated the Methods section to specify that participants were from four institutions, consistent with the Workshop Overview section. &nbsp;We also want to clarify that, due to the small number of participants and the need to preserve anonymity, participant profiles are reported using broad, aggregated role and experience categories rather than being broken down by individual institution or facility department. These aggregated participant characteristics are shown in Figure 2, which presents the overall distribution of roles and experience levels across the workshops.  \n<b>5. Clarifying recruitment, selection, and potential selection bias<\/b> We agree that the recruitment process requires further clarification. &nbsp;We have revised the Methods section to clarify that these were pilot workshops and that the institutions approached were selected in advance by the authors to ensure the workshops were manageable and feasible within the available time, staffing, and logistical constraints. We have clarified that an invitation outlining the workshop\u2019s aims and structure was circulated via email to senior management in animal facility departments at institutions that had previously expressed interest in research delivery. &nbsp; We have also added that, as this was a pilot and exploratory study, the recruitment strategy was not intended to generate a statistically representative sample. &nbsp;We acknowledge that selection bias may have been present, particularly because institutions and individuals with an existing interest in AT engagement were more likely to participate. &nbsp;However, we sought to manage this pragmatically by including participants from different institutions, roles, and career stages.  \n<b>6. Linking workshop activities to the main objective of the paper<\/b> We agree that the relationship between the workshop activities and the paper\u2019s main objective needs to be made more explicit. &nbsp;We have revised the Results and Discussion to clarify that poster design was used as a practical vehicle for scientific communication, rather than being the sole focus of the workshops.  \n<b>7. Explaining how the workshops supported confidence, courage, and communication with scientists<\/b> We agree with the reviewer that this point should be developed further. &nbsp;We have revised the manuscript (Activities 2\/3 and Discussion) to explain that the workshops aimed to create a supportive environment in which ATs could reflect on their own scientific role, share experiences with peers, and practise communicating their expertise in a structured and constructive way. We now describe the workshops as supporting confidence, self-awareness, professional ownership, peer support, and constructive assertiveness. &nbsp;  \n<b>8. Institutional implementation and creating space for AT engagement<\/b> We agree that the manuscript would benefit from more practical reflection on how institutions can create space for ATs to engage in research discussions. &nbsp;We have expanded the Discussion to emphasise that communication and scientific reflection should be embedded into routine facility and research culture, rather than treated as optional or additional activities. &nbsp; We hope these revisions have strengthened the manuscript's clarity, methodological framing, and practical applicability, particularly regarding how the resource and workshop approach can support AT engagement in scientific communication within research facilities and teams.","URL":"https:\/\/wellcomeopenresearch.org\/articles\/11-243\/v1#referee-comment-6629","order":3,"name":"referee-comment-6629","label":"Referee Comment","group":{"name":"article-reports","label":"Article Reports"}},{"value":"This work was supported by the Sainsbury Wellcome Centre Core Grant from the Gatsby Charitable Foundation and Wellcome (grant numbers GAT4057 and 318818\/Z\/24\/Z).","order":4,"name":"grant-information","label":"Grant Information"},{"value":"This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.","order":0,"name":"copyright-info","label":"Copyright"}]}}