Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33786698›Full record

ReviewCellular and molecular neurobiology2022

Preclinical Stroke Research and Translational Failure: A Bird's Eye View on Preventable Variables.

Devendra Singh, Himika Wasan, K H Reeta

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cellular and molecular neurobiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Devendra SinghDepartment of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2412-5997
Himika WasanDepartment of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3919-571X
K H ReetaDepartment of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India. drkhreeta@aiims.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3824-5498

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite achieving remarkable success in understanding the cellular, molecular and pathophysiological aspects of stroke, translation from preclinical research has always remained an area of debate. Although thousands of experimental compounds have been reported to be neuro-protective, their failures in clinical setting have left the researchers and stakeholders in doldrums. Though the failures described have been excruciating, they also give us a chance to refocus on the shortcomings. For better translational value, evidences from preclinical studies should be robust and reliable. Preclinical study design has a plethora of variables affecting the study outcome. Hence, this review focusses on the factors to be considered for a well-planned preclinical study while adhering to guidelines with emphasis on the study design, commonly used animal models, their limitations with special attention on various preventable attritions including comorbidities, aged animals, time of dosing, outcome measures and physiological variables along with the concept of multicentric preclinical randomized controlled trials. Here, we provide an overview of a panorama of practical aspects, which could be implemented, so that a well-defined preclinical study would result in a neuro-protectant with better translational value.

Indexed as

StrokeTranslational Research, BiomedicalAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnimal modelsIschemic strokePreclinical randomized controlled trialsPreclinical study designTranslational failure

Identifiers

PMID33786698
PMCPMC11421600

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.