ArticlePLoS biology2018
Reproducible preclinical research-Is embracing variability the answer?
Article in PLoS biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Global trends, translational gaps, and emerging research directions inFrontiers in fungal biology · 2026Pooled it
- Translational Intracerebral Hemorrhage Research: Has Current Neuroprotection Research ARRIVEd at a Standard for Experimental Design and Reporting?Translational stroke research · 2020Pooled it
- Prevalence and Prevention of Reproducibility Deficiencies in Life Sciences Research: Large-Scale Meta-Analyses.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Article
- Bioaccessibility and nutraceutical potential of phenolic compounds in Annona crassiflora Mart. pulp for colorectal chemoprevention.European journal of nutrition · 2025Article
- 5-Hydroxytryptophan, a Precursor for Serotonin Synthesis, Alleviated Cognitive Dysfunction in a Mouse Model of Sepsis-Associated Encephalopathy.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Continent-wide differentiation of fitness traits and patterns of climate adaptation among European populations ofEvolution letters · 2025Article
- Characterization of commercial detectors for absolute proton UHDR dosimetry on a compact clinical proton synchrocyclotron.Medical physics · 2025Article
- CombattingAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Navigating the paradigm shift of sex inclusive preclinical research and lessons learnt.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Review
- Current status of next-generation vaccines against mpox virus: a scoping review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Article
- Multi-Institutional Audit of FLASH and Conventional Dosimetry With a 3D Printed Anatomically Realistic Mouse Phantom.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024Article
- Unbiased serum metabolomic analysis in cats with naturally occurring chronic enteropathies before and after medical intervention.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The intervention of cannabinoid receptor in chronic and acute kidney disease animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2024Review
- Finding the right power balance: Better study design and collaboration can reduce dependence on statistical power.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Variability in variability: does variation in morphological and physiological traits differ between men and women?Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- A multi-lab experimental assessment reveals that replicability can be improved by using empirical estimates of genotype-by-lab interaction.PLoS biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Translational failures and replication issues of published research are undermining preclinical research and, if the outcomes are questionable, raise ethical implications over the continued use of animals. Standardization of procedures, environmental conditions, and genetic background has traditionally been proposed as the gold standard approach, as it reduces variability, thereby enhancing sensitivity and supporting reproducibility when the environment is defined precisely. An alternative view is that standardization can identify idiosyncratic effects and hence decrease reproducibility. In support of this alternative view, Voelkl and colleagues present evidence from resampling a large quantity of research data exploring a variety of treatments. They demonstrate that by implementing multi-laboratory experiments with as few as two sites, we can increase reproducibility by embracing variation without increasing the sample size.
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.