Distinguishing between Exploratory and Confirmatory Preclinical Research Will Improve Translation

PLoS Biology

Volumn 12, Issue 5, 2014, Pages

  Kimmelman, Jonathan ^a   Mogil, Jeffrey S ^b   Dirnagl, Ulrich ^c,d,e  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^d GERMAN CENTER FOR NEURODEGENERATIVE DISEASES DZNE   (Germany)

^e DZHK GERMAN CENTRE FOR CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFIRMATORY RESEARCH; DRUG RESEARCH; EXPLORATORY RESEARCH; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; RANDOM ERROR; SAMPLE SIZE; STUDY DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH; VALIDITY; ANIMAL; DRUG SCREENING; HUMAN; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALS; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; HUMANS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; TRANSLATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH;

EID: 84901415559     PISSN: 15449173     EISSN: 15457885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001863     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. van der Worp HB, Howells DW, Sena ES, Porritt MJ, Rewell S, et al. (2010) Can animal models of disease reliably inform human studies? PLoS Med 7: e1000245.
2. Steward O, Popovich PG, Dietrich WD, Kleitman N, (2012) Replication and reproducibility in spinal cord injury research. Exp Neurol 233: 597-605.
3. Sena ES, van der Worp HB, Bath PM, Howells DW, Macleod M, (2010) Publication bias in reports of animal stroke studies leads to major overstatement of efficacy. PLoS Biol 8: e1000344.
4. Landis SC, Amara SG, Asadullah K, Austin CP, Blumenstein R, et al. (2012) A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature 490: 187-191.
5. Mogil JS, Simmonds K, Simmonds MJ, (2009) Pain research from 1975 to 2007: a categorical and bibliometric meta-trend analysis of every Research Paper published in the journal, Pain. Pain 142: 48-58.
6. Schmidt S, (2009) Shall we really do it again? The powerful concept of replication is neglected in the social sciences. Rev Gen Psychol 13: 90-100.
7. Button KS, Ioannidis JP, Mokrysz C, Nosek BA, Flint J, et al. (2013) Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci 14: 365-378.
8. Shackleton M, Quintana E, Fearon ER, Morrison SJ, (2009) Heterogeneity in cancer: cancer stem cells versus clonal evolution. Cell 138: 822-829.
9. Henderson VC, Kimmelman J, Fergusson D, Grimshaw JM, Hackam DG, (2013) Threats to Validity in the Design and Conduct of Preclinical Efficacy Studies: A Systematic Review of Guidelines for In Vivo Animal Experiments. PLoS Med 10: e1001489.
10. Howells DW, Sena ES, Macleod MR, (2014) Bringing rigour to translational medicine. Nat Rev Neurol 10: 37-43.
11. Wagenmakers E-J, Wetzels R, Borsboom D, Maas HLJvd, Kievit RA, (2012) An agenda for purely confirmatory research. Perspect Psychol Sci 7: 632-638.
12. Willmann R, De Luca A, Benatar M, Grounds M, Dubach J, et al. (2012) Enhancing translation: guidelines for standard pre-clinical experiments in mdx mice. Neuromuscul Disord 22: 43-49.
13. Dirnagl U, Hakim A, Macleod M, Fisher M, Howells D, et al. (2013) A concerted appeal for international cooperation in preclinical stroke research. Stroke 44: 1754-1760.
14. Kimmelman J, Anderson JA, (2012) Should preclinical studies be registered? Nat Biotechnol 30: 488-489.
15. Chambers CD, (2013) Registered reports: a new publishing initiative at Cortex. Cortex 49: 609-610.
16. Experimental Psychology (2014) Instructions to authors. Experimental psychology. Boston: Hogrefe Publishing.
17. Hull DL (1988) Science as a process: an evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.