Genuine replication and pseudoreplication: what’s the difference?

  By Stanley E. Lazic (@StanLazic) Replication is a key idea in science and statistics, but is often misunderstood by researchers because they receive little education or training on experimental design. Consequently, the wrong entity is replicated in many experiments, leading to pseudoreplication or the “unit of analysis” problem [1,2]. This results in exaggerated sample […]

Read More…

Response: Let’s work together to explore the evidence base for all preclinical research methodologies

  In response to: Drug discovery and preclinical drug development – have animal studies really failed? By Pandora Pound and Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga A case of the ‘straw man’? We came across this blog in BMJ Open Science by chance this week. The blog, entitled ‘Drug discovery and preclinical drug development – have animal studies really […]

Read More…

Diversity in science isn’t just about the workforce – it is about the research itself

By Natasha Karp When you hear the phrase “diversity in science”, you typically think about the efforts to create a diverse and inclusive scientific workforce.  However, it is also about the research we conduct.  For over twenty years [1] papers have been raising an issue that we have a sex bias as the research community […]

Read More…

Drug Discovery and Preclinical Drug Development – Have Animal Studies Really Failed?

  By Thomas Steckler and Malcolm Macleod  The ethics of the use of animals in research continue to be a matter for discussion, with a recent op-ed in the Journal of Translational Medicine arguing – on the grounds that non-human animals are quite different from “human animals” – that animal models can no longer be considered helpful in the development […]

Read More…

Making research more useful: minimal reporting standards for life scientists

By Malcolm Macleod (@Maclomaclee) As researchers, we hope that our research findings are useful – that they inform future research, or lead to changes in policy or practice. Different research designs provide different levels of proof, with experimental evidence generally providing better evidence than observational studies. Even within research designs, there are factors which might […]

Read More…

Navigating the maze together: a patient’s perspective

“The strength of a common agenda” – John Ioannidis, Stanford University Lost in the Maze? Navigating Evidence and Ethics in Translational Neuroscience, Herrenhausen Conference, Hannover, February 2018 By Rebecca Morrison Communication and Trust From the opening session, it was clear even to one for whom ‘translation’ hitherto had been the domain of moving from one language to another […]

Read More…

Academic Freedom or Jester’s License?

By Lucia Reuter (@LuciaReuter) Science is a self-regulating profession. It always has been and continues to be relatively free from external state legislation, because scientists – equipped with specialized and superior knowledge – are best fit to determine the rules of their game. This liberal view is so deeply embedded in many (western) societies, that it is also […]

Read More…

Remembering Doug Altman

By Zsanett Bahor “We need less research, better research, and research done for the right reasons” Read the first line of Doug Altman’s influential Editorial ‘The Scandal of Poor Medical Research’ in 1994, a publication, which later topped The British Medical Journal’s list of most important papers from the last twenty years. Incidentally, this statement […]

Read More…

“Lost in the Maze? Navigating Evidence and Ethics in Translational Neuroscience”: Herrenhausen Conference, Hannover, Germany 2018

By Sarah McCann ‘It is a veritable desert as far as favourable outcomes in neurological research are concerned’ –Jonathan Kimmelman, bioethicist The reasons behind our failure to translate preclinical efficacy to clinical benefit, and the ethical challenges associated with early phase clinical trials of these treatments were dissected and debated at Herrenhausen Palace in February. […]

Read More…