Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Bringing rigour to translational medicine.
Austin Authors: Howells, David William;Sena, Emily S;Macleod, Malcolm R
Affiliation: Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK
Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, 245 Burgundy Street, Heidelberg, Vic 3084, Australia
Issue Date: 19-Nov-2013
Publication information: Nature Reviews. Neurology 2013; 10(1): 37-43
Abstract: Translational neuroscience is in the doldrums. The stroke research community was among the first to recognize that the motivations inherent in our system of research can cause investigators to take shortcuts, and can introduce bias and reduce generalizability, all of which leads ultimately to the recurrent failure of apparently useful drug candidates in clinical trials. Here, we review the evidence for these problems in stroke research, where they have been most studied, and in other translational research domains, which seem to be bedevilled by the same issues. We argue that better scientific training and simple changes to the way that we fund, assess and publish research findings could reduce wasted investment, speed drug development, and create a healthier research environment. For 'phase III' preclinical studies--that is, those studies that build the final justification for conducting a clinical trial--we argue for a need to apply the same attention to detail, experimental rigour and statistical power in our animal experiments as in the clinical trials themselves.
Gov't Doc #: 24247324
DOI: 10.1038/nrneurol.2013.232
Journal: Nature reviews. Neurology
Type: Journal Article
Subjects: Animals
Translational Medical Research
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

checked on Nov 29, 2023

Google ScholarTM


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.