ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Strengthening translational preclinical research through confirmatory multi-laboratory studies.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The 5% Problem: How the Biomedical Community Responded to the Animal-to-Human Translation Crisis, and the Case for Non-Animal Methods.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Reduce or not reduce: a practical guide to calculate sample size for various experimental design in studies involving animals.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Successful translation of promising preclinical findings into clinical application remains challenging. To address the rising concerns of failing clinical trials and the resulting economic, social, and ethical consequences, preclinical confirmatory studies have been proposed to generate sufficiently robust evidence for guiding the decision-making process. In a unique funding call, 17 studies in Germany aimed to confirm exploratory findings across various biomedical research fields in a rigorously planned and executed multi-laboratory set-up. Alongside these preclinical research projects, a meta-research project was funded to provide methodological support and collectively investigate confirmatory study design and experimental outcomes. After the first four-year funding period, an in-person workshop brought together representatives from the preclinical confirmatory studies to discuss lessons learned. We summarize the outcomes of these stakeholder discussions, highlight common pitfalls, and propose optimization strategies for experimental set-up and project coordination. As a result, we advocate for new roles-such as preclinical research coordinators-and improved rules and regulations in preclinical research to facilitate large-scale academic research projects. Moreover, we highlight that diverse stakeholders must collaborate to effectively integrate confirmatory multi-laboratory studies into the preclinical research ecosystem.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.