Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBracher, M
dc.contributor.authorPilkington, GJ
dc.contributor.authorHanemann, CO
dc.contributor.authorPilkington, K
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-01T07:18:09Z
dc.date.issued2020-08-07
dc.identifier.issn2296-4185
dc.identifier.issn2296-4185
dc.identifier.otherARTN 936
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/16449
dc.description.abstract

BACKGROUND: A wide range of human in vitro methods have been developed and there is considerable interest in the potential of these studies to address questions related to clinical (human) use of drugs, and the pathobiology of tumours. This requires agreement on how to assess the strength of evidence available (i.e., quality and quantity) and the human-relevance of such studies. The SAToRI-BTR (Systematic Approach To Review of in vitro methods in Brain Tumour Research) project seeks to identify relevant appraisal criteria to aid planning and/or evaluation of brain tumour studies using in vitro methods. OBJECTIVES: To identify criteria for evaluation of quality and human relevance of in vitro brain tumour studies; to assess the general acceptability of such criteria to senior scientists working within the field. METHODS: Stage one involved identification of potential criteria for evaluation of in vitro studies through: (1) an international survey of brain tumour researchers; (2) interviews with scientists, clinicians, regulators, and journal editors; (3) analysis of relevant reports, documents, and published studies. Through content analysis of findings, an initial list of criteria for quality appraisal of in vitro studies of brain tumours was developed. Stage two involved review of the criteria by an expert panel (Delphi process). RESULTS: Results of stage one indicated that methods for and quality of review of in vitro studies are highly variable, and that improved reporting standards are needed. 129 preliminary criteria were identified; duplicate and highly context-specific items were removed, resulting in 48 criteria for review by the expert (Delphi) panel. 37 criteria reached agreement, resulting in a provisional checklist for appraisal of in vitro studies in brain tumour research. CONCLUSION: Through a systematic process of collating assessment criteria and subjecting these to expert review, SAToRI-BTR has resulted in preliminary guidance for appraisal of in vitro brain tumour studies. Further development of this guidance, including investigating strategies for adaptation and dissemination across different sub-fields of brain tumour research, as well as the wider in vitro field, is planned.

dc.format.extent936-
dc.format.mediumElectronic-eCollection
dc.languageeng
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherFrontiers Media SA
dc.subjectin vitro
dc.subjectquality appraisal
dc.subjectevaluation
dc.subjectcritical appraisal
dc.subjectbrain tumour
dc.subjectcancer
dc.subjectsystematic review
dc.titleA Systematic Approach to Review of in vitro Methods in Brain Tumour Research (SAToRI-BTR): Development of a Preliminary Checklist for Evaluating Quality and Human Relevance
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeReview
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32850761
plymouth.volume8
plymouth.publication-statusPublished online
plymouth.journalFrontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fbioe.2020.00936
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA01 Clinical Medicine
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CBR
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Researchers in ResearchFish submission
dc.publisher.placeSwitzerland
dcterms.dateAccepted2020-07-20
dc.rights.embargodate2020-10-2
dc.identifier.eissn2296-4185
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.3389/fbioe.2020.00936
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2020-08-07
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV