Ch. 10— Information Resources and Computer Systems • 239 
Federal Government agencies have access to 
some of the unpublished information held by in- 
dustry, through reporting rules promulgated un- 
der the Toxic Substances Control Act, for exam- 
ple, and through registration requirements of the 
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. 
This information is used for a variety of regula- 
tory activities and is frequently available to the 
public under the Freedom of Information Act. It 
may also be added to databases. 
There are several barriers to using available in- 
formation. One is that users who wish to base im- 
portant decisions on data need to know how relia- 
ble the data are. In assessing reliability, scientists 
will consider not only the protocol used but also 
the professional reputation of the scientist, the 
journal in which the article is published, and where 
the research or testing was done. If the format 
of the data (e.g., a numerical database) does not 
allow the quality to be assessed, the data may have 
little value. The imprimatur of peer review is an 
additional factor when assessing data quality. 
International barriers to sharing information in- 
clude language, the delays and expense of com- 
munication, the lack of personal acquaintances 
who could facilitate networking, and political and 
institutional differences. 
Hundreds of thousands of research and testing 
articles are published each year. Most of these arti- 
cles and other resources are available through ab- 
stracting and indexing services and through bib- 
liographic services. No service, unfortunately, is 
so comprehensive that it can be relied on as a sole 
source. However, when multiple sources are used, 
there can be a great deal of overlap. Another prob- 
lem is that the summary information may be in- 
adequate to judge whether the complete article 
should be obtained. Citation services also exist for 
unpublished data and ongoing experiments, some 
on an international level. 
Computers are quite valuable in obtaining ac- 
cess to information. Many of the abstracting and 
indexing services and bibliographic services are 
available on computer. Recently, the full text of 
some scientific journals— except for graphs and 
images— has become available on-line. In princi- 
ple, a computer-based registry of research and test- 
ing data could reduce the use of animals in research 
and testing. In practice, the best design of such 
a computerized database remains uncertain. 
One attempt toward a modest, well-defined data 
registry, the Laboratory Animal Data Bank, failed. 
Any new effort to establish a comprehensive data- 
base that includes descriptions of experimental 
protocols, control and experimental results, and 
peer review will benefit from the lessons learned 
from LADB. The creation and maintenance of a 
computerized registry of baseline and experi- 
mental results from all species of vertebrate ani- 
mals would be 3 to 15 times more complex than 
the defunct LADB. 
The initial step towards assembling a computer- 
ized data registry is the clear definition of both 
its potential users and their specific needs. The 
acceptance of a new biological data bank by the 
user community and the registry’s success in sup- 
plying useful research and testing data are closely 
linked to how well the data bank meets user needs . 
Thus, the probable success or failure of a new data 
bank can be predicted in advance of the collec- 
tion or dissemination of the data. 
CHAPTER 10 REFERENCES 
1. Altman, P.L. (ed .), Pathology of Laboratory Mice and 
Rats (New York: Pergamon Press, 1985). 
2. Altman, P.L., and Fisher, K.D., Review of Data Stand- 
ards Related to the Laboratory Animal Data Bank— 
Interim Report (Bethesda, MD: Federation of Amer- 
ican Societies for Experimental Biology, 1980). 
3. Altman, P.L., and Fisher, K.D., Assessment of the 
Laboratory Animal Data Bank in Meeting Needs of 
Users (Bethesda, MD: Federation of American So- 
cieties for Experimental Biology, 1980). 
4. Altman, P.L., and Fisher, K.D., Guidelines for De- 
velopment of Biology Data Banks (Bethesda, MD: 
Federation of American Societies for Experimental 
Biology, 1981). 
5. Altman, P.L., and Fisher, K.D ., A User Assessment 
of the Toxicology Data Bank (Bethesda, MD: Feder- 
