2 Research products, page 1 of 1
Loading
- Publication . Article . Other literature type . Clinical Trial . 2021Open AccessAuthors:Motahareh Vameghestahbanati; Miranda Kirby; François Maltais; Dennis Jensen; Dany Doiron; Wan C. Tan; Jean Bourbeau; Benjamin M. Smith; Yves Lacasse; Denis O’Donnell; +14 moreMotahareh Vameghestahbanati; Miranda Kirby; François Maltais; Dennis Jensen; Dany Doiron; Wan C. Tan; Jean Bourbeau; Benjamin M. Smith; Yves Lacasse; Denis O’Donnell; Robert Cowie; Kenneth Chapman; Roger Goldstein; Darcy Marciniuk; Aaron Shawn; Andrea Benedetti; Paul Hernandez; Mark Fitzgerald; Teresa To; Hélène Perrault; Tanja Taivassalo; William Sheel; Peter Pare; James C. Hogg;Publisher: American Thoracic SocietyAverage popularityAverage popularity In bottom 99%Average influencePopularity: Citation-based measure reflecting the current impact.Average influence In bottom 99%Influence: Citation-based measure reflecting the total impact.
add Add to ORCIDPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product. - Publication . Article . Clinical Trial . Other literature type . 2021Open AccessAuthors:Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; David Moher; Marilena Loizidou; Irfan Ahmed; Marc T. Avey; Carly C. Barron; Brian R. Davidson; Miriam Dwek; Christian Gluud; Gavin Jell; +8 moreKurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; David Moher; Marilena Loizidou; Irfan Ahmed; Marc T. Avey; Carly C. Barron; Brian R. Davidson; Miriam Dwek; Christian Gluud; Gavin Jell; Kiran Kumar Katakam; Joshua Montroy; Timothy D. McHugh; Nicola J. Osborne; Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga; Kees van Laarhoven; Jan Vollert; Manoj M. Lalu;Publisher: PeerJCountry: Netherlands
Background Only a small proportion of preclinical research (research performed in animal models prior to clinical trials in humans) translates into clinical benefit in humans. Possible reasons for the lack of translation of the results observed in preclinical research into human clinical benefit include the design, conduct, and reporting of preclinical studies. There is currently no formal domain-based assessment of the clinical relevance of preclinical research. To address this issue, we have developed a tool for the assessment of the clinical relevance of preclinical studies, with the intention of assessing the likelihood that therapeutic preclinical findings can be translated into improvement in the management of human diseases. Methods We searched the EQUATOR network for guidelines that describe the design, conduct, and reporting of preclinical research. We searched the references of these guidelines to identify further relevant publications and developed a set of domains and signalling questions. We then conducted a modified Delphi-consensus to refine and develop the tool. The Delphi panel members included specialists in evidence-based (preclinical) medicine specialists, methodologists, preclinical animal researchers, a veterinarian, and clinical researchers. A total of 20 Delphi-panel members completed the first round and 17 members from five countries completed all three rounds. Results This tool has eight domains (construct validity, external validity, risk of bias, experimental design and data analysis plan, reproducibility and replicability of methods and results in the same model, research integrity, and research transparency) and a total of 28 signalling questions and provides a framework for researchers, journal editors, grant funders, and regulatory authorities to assess the potential clinical relevance of preclinical animal research. Conclusion We have developed a tool to assess the clinical relevance of preclinical studies. This tool is currently being piloted.
Average popularityAverage popularity In bottom 99%Average influencePopularity: Citation-based measure reflecting the current impact.Average influence In bottom 99%Influence: Citation-based measure reflecting the total impact.add Add to ORCIDPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
2 Research products, page 1 of 1
Loading
- Publication . Article . Other literature type . Clinical Trial . 2021Open AccessAuthors:Motahareh Vameghestahbanati; Miranda Kirby; François Maltais; Dennis Jensen; Dany Doiron; Wan C. Tan; Jean Bourbeau; Benjamin M. Smith; Yves Lacasse; Denis O’Donnell; +14 moreMotahareh Vameghestahbanati; Miranda Kirby; François Maltais; Dennis Jensen; Dany Doiron; Wan C. Tan; Jean Bourbeau; Benjamin M. Smith; Yves Lacasse; Denis O’Donnell; Robert Cowie; Kenneth Chapman; Roger Goldstein; Darcy Marciniuk; Aaron Shawn; Andrea Benedetti; Paul Hernandez; Mark Fitzgerald; Teresa To; Hélène Perrault; Tanja Taivassalo; William Sheel; Peter Pare; James C. Hogg;Publisher: American Thoracic SocietyAverage popularityAverage popularity In bottom 99%Average influencePopularity: Citation-based measure reflecting the current impact.Average influence In bottom 99%Influence: Citation-based measure reflecting the total impact.
add Add to ORCIDPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product. - Publication . Article . Clinical Trial . Other literature type . 2021Open AccessAuthors:Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; David Moher; Marilena Loizidou; Irfan Ahmed; Marc T. Avey; Carly C. Barron; Brian R. Davidson; Miriam Dwek; Christian Gluud; Gavin Jell; +8 moreKurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; David Moher; Marilena Loizidou; Irfan Ahmed; Marc T. Avey; Carly C. Barron; Brian R. Davidson; Miriam Dwek; Christian Gluud; Gavin Jell; Kiran Kumar Katakam; Joshua Montroy; Timothy D. McHugh; Nicola J. Osborne; Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga; Kees van Laarhoven; Jan Vollert; Manoj M. Lalu;Publisher: PeerJCountry: Netherlands
Background Only a small proportion of preclinical research (research performed in animal models prior to clinical trials in humans) translates into clinical benefit in humans. Possible reasons for the lack of translation of the results observed in preclinical research into human clinical benefit include the design, conduct, and reporting of preclinical studies. There is currently no formal domain-based assessment of the clinical relevance of preclinical research. To address this issue, we have developed a tool for the assessment of the clinical relevance of preclinical studies, with the intention of assessing the likelihood that therapeutic preclinical findings can be translated into improvement in the management of human diseases. Methods We searched the EQUATOR network for guidelines that describe the design, conduct, and reporting of preclinical research. We searched the references of these guidelines to identify further relevant publications and developed a set of domains and signalling questions. We then conducted a modified Delphi-consensus to refine and develop the tool. The Delphi panel members included specialists in evidence-based (preclinical) medicine specialists, methodologists, preclinical animal researchers, a veterinarian, and clinical researchers. A total of 20 Delphi-panel members completed the first round and 17 members from five countries completed all three rounds. Results This tool has eight domains (construct validity, external validity, risk of bias, experimental design and data analysis plan, reproducibility and replicability of methods and results in the same model, research integrity, and research transparency) and a total of 28 signalling questions and provides a framework for researchers, journal editors, grant funders, and regulatory authorities to assess the potential clinical relevance of preclinical animal research. Conclusion We have developed a tool to assess the clinical relevance of preclinical studies. This tool is currently being piloted.
Average popularityAverage popularity In bottom 99%Average influencePopularity: Citation-based measure reflecting the current impact.Average influence In bottom 99%Influence: Citation-based measure reflecting the total impact.add Add to ORCIDPlease grant OpenAIRE to access and update your ORCID works.This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.
You have already added works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.