ReviewScience translational medicine2010
Lost in translation: neuropsychiatric drug development.
Review in Science translational medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Drug repurposing: a systematic review on root causes, barriers and facilitators.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- What Remains to Be Discovered in Schizophrenia Therapeutics: Contributions by Advancing the Molecular Mechanisms of Drugs for Psychosis and Schizophrenia.Biomolecules · 2024Review
- The foundation and architecture of precision medicine in neurology and psychiatry.Trends in neurosciences · 2023Review
- Targeting NMDA receptors in neuropsychiatric disorders by drug screening on human neurons derived from pluripotent stem cells.Translational psychiatry · 2022Review
- Repurposing Immunomodulatory Imide Drugs (IMiDs) in Neuropsychiatric and Neurodegenerative Disorders.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Review
- The Evolution of Stem Cells, Disease Modeling, and Drug Discovery for Neurological Disorders.Stem cells and development · 2020Review
- Towards High-Throughput Chemobehavioural Phenomics in Neuropsychiatric Drug Discovery.Marine drugs · 2019Review
- Genetics of Alcohol Use Disorder: A Role for Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells?Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research · 2018Review
- Does traumatic brain injury hold the key to the Alzheimer's disease puzzle?Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2018Review
- (-)-Phenserine and Inhibiting Pre-Programmed Cell Death: In Pursuit of a Novel Intervention for Alzheimer's Disease.Current Alzheimer research · 2018Review
- Drug discovery and development: Role of basic biological research.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) · 2017Review
- Mild traumatic brain injury-induced hippocampal gene expressions: The identification of target cellular processes for drug development.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2016Article
- Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells as a Novel Tool in Psychiatric Research.Psychiatry investigation · 2016Review
- What can triumphs and tribulations from drug research in Alzheimer's disease tell us about the development of psychotropic drugs in general?The lancet. Psychiatry · 2015Review
- A new regulatory road-map for Alzheimer's disease drug development.Current Alzheimer research · 2014Review
- Linking Alzheimer's disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus via aberrant insulin signaling and inflammation.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2014Review
- A new roadmap for drug development for Alzheimer's disease.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2014Article
- Advances in understanding Alzheimer's disease, and the contributions of current Alzheimer research: ten years on and beyond.Current Alzheimer research · 2014Article
- Incretin mimetics as pharmacologic tools to elucidate and as a new drug strategy to treat traumatic brain injury.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent studies have identified troubling method and practice lapses in neuropsychiatric drug developments. These problems have resulted in errors that are of sufficient magnitude to invalidate clinical trial data and interpretations. We identify two potential sources for these difficulties: investigators selectively choosing scientific practices for demonstrations of efficacy in human-testing phases of drug development and investigators failing to anticipate the needs of practitioners who must optimize treatment for the individual patient. When clinical investigators neglect to use clinical trials as opportunities to test hypotheses of disease mechanisms in humans, the neuropsychiatric knowledge base loses both credibility and scope. When clinical investigators do not anticipate the need to translate discoveries into applications, the practitioner cannot provide optimal care for the patient. We conclude from this evidence that clinical trials, and other aspects of neuropsychiatric drug development, must adopt more practices from basic science and show greater responsiveness to conditions of clinical practice. We feel that these changes are necessary to overcome current threats to the validity and utility of studies of neurological and psychiatric drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.