The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Replication and reproducibility in spinal cord injury research
Abstract
This special issue of Experimental Neurology compiles a series of papers that either explicitly replicate published studies or retest phenomena reported in previous publications. The explicit replications were carried out as part of the "Facilities of Research Excellence-Spinal Cord Injury" (FORE-SCI) program launched by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) in 2003. Here, we review the FORE-SCI replication experiments published prior to those in this special issue. We then discuss emerging issues regarding replication and reproducibility in spinal cord injury research, especially in terms of potential translation to clinical trials.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Of 12 replications of preclinical spinal cord injury research in the FORE-SCI program, only two clearly replicated the original findings”
From Investigating the replicability of preclinical cancer biology (2021) · cites this paper as Steward et al., 2012
In the citing paper
“The low replication success rates and small effect sizes we found reinforce prior calls for improving the rigor and transparency of preclinical research to improve the allocation of limited resources and to protect human participants from being enrolled in trials that are based on weak evidence”
From Investigating the replicability of preclinical cancer biology (2021) · cites this paper as Steward et al., 2012
In the citing paper
“Some pivotal aspects of study design, such as randomization and the blinding of investigators who analyse the results of animal experiments, are used in less than 20% of studies16–18”
From How to design preclinical studies in nanomedicine and cell therapy to maximize the prospects of clinical translation (2018) · cites this paper as [18]
Citations
Cites
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
the CONSORT Group, Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Moher, D. (2010) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-8-18 · Cited by 13,371
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2005.10722754 · Cited by 4,702
A Sensitive and Reliable Locomotor Rating Scale for Open Field Testing in Rats
BASSO, D. M., BEATTIE, M. S., & BRESNAHAN, J. C. (1995) · Journal of Neurotrauma · doi:10.1089/neu.1995.12.1 · Cited by 3,963
Chondroitinase ABC promotes functional recovery after spinal cord injury
Bradbury, E. J., Moon, L. D. F., Popat, R. J., King, V. R., Bennett, G. S., Patel, P. N., Fawcett, J. W., & McMahon, S. B. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/416636a · Cited by 2,357
CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., & for the CONSORT Group (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000251 · Cited by 2,296
Basso, D., Fisher, L., Anderson, A., Jakeman, L., McTigue, D. M., & Popovich, P. (2006) · Journal of Neurotrauma · doi:10.1089/neu.2006.23.635 · Cited by 1,615
Self-citationCellular prion protein mediates impairment of synaptic plasticity by amyloid-β oligomers
Laurén, J., Gimbel, D. A., Nygaard, H. B., Gilbert, J. W., & Strittmatter, S. M. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature07761 · Cited by 1,560
Keirstead, H. S., Nistor, G., Bernal, G. M., Totoiu, M. O., Cloutier, F., Sharp, K. L., & Steward, O. (2005) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0311-05.2005 · Cited by 1,263
Self-citationRecommendations for Standards Regarding Preclinical Neuroprotective and Restorative Drug Development
Roundtable, S. T. A. I. (1999) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.30.12.2752 · Cited by 1,256
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research
Landis, S. C., Amara, S. G., Asadullah, K., Austin, C. P., Blumenstein, R., Bradley, E. W., Crystal, R. G., Darnell, R. B., Ferrante, R. J., Fillit, H., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11556 · Cited by 1,196
Self-citationThe economics of reproducibility in preclinical research
Freedman, L. P., Cockburn, I. M., & Simcoe, T. S. (2015) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002165 · Cited by 1,055
From basics to clinical: A comprehensive review on spinal cord injury
Silva, N. A., Sousa, N., Reis, R. L., & Salgado, A. J. (2013) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.11.002 · Cited by 838
Bramlett, H. M., & Dietrich, W. D. (2014) · Journal of Neurotrauma · doi:10.1089/neu.2014.3352 · Cited by 590
Self-citationInvestigating the replicability of preclinical cancer biology
Errington, T. M., Mathur, M., Soderberg, C. K., Denis, A., Perfito, N., Iorns, E., & Nosek, B. A. (2021) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.71601 · Cited by 462
“The low replication success rates and small effect sizes we found reinforce prior calls for improving the rigor and transparency of preclinical research to improve the allocation of limited resources and to protect human participants from being enrolled in trials that are based on weak evidence (Landis et al., 2012; P…”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Steward, O., Popovich, P. G., Dietrich, W. D., & Kleitman, N.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- The Ohio State University (US)
- University of Miami (US)
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Steward, Oswald
- Venue
- Experimental Neurology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-02
- Volume
- 233
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 597-605
- ISSN
- 0014-4886 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2085512194
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 52
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 10.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Experimental Neurology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- N01-NS-3-2353
- HHSN271200800039C
- HHSN271200800040C
- N01-NS-3-2352
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Spinal Cord Injury Research
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
- Keywords
- spinal cord injury, replication study, reproducibility, clinical translation, translational research, research reproducibility
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Pilot Projects, Spinal Cord Injuries, Reproducibility of Results, Biomedical Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
