Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Clinical relevance assessment of animal preclinical research (RAA) tool: development and explanation

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

DOI

  1. Knee replacement outcome predicted by physiotherapists: a prospective cohort study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Extracellular vesicles in patients in the acute phase of psychosis and after clinical improvement: an explorative study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Prognostic value of complementary biomarkers of neurodegeneration in a mixed memory clinic cohort

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Automated pupillometry to detect command following in neurological patients: a proof-of-concept study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  5. Cortical modulation of pupillary function: systematic review

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  • Kurinchi S Gurusamy
  • David Moher
  • Marilena Loizidou
  • Irfan Ahmed
  • Marc T Avey
  • Carly C Barron
  • Brian Davidson
  • Miriam Dwek
  • Christian Gluud
  • Gavin Jell
  • Kiran Katakam
  • Joshua Montroy
  • Timothy D McHugh
  • Nicola J Osborne
  • Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga
  • Kees van Laarhoven
  • Jan Vollert
  • Manoj Lalu
View graph of relations

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.

Original languageEnglish
JournalPeerJ
Volume9
Pages (from-to)e10673
ISSN2167-8359
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2021

ID: 62405538