medicine2 papersavg year 2026quality 3/5moderate evidence
In vivo validation
Research gap analysis derived from 2 medicine papers in our local library.
The gap
Most studies lack in vivo animal or clinical validation of their findings observed in vitro or using organoid models.
Consensus across the literature
The papers collectively establish the need for in vivo validation but leave open the specific methods and populations required.
Research trend
Emerging — attention growing, methods still coalescing.
Supporting evidence — 2 representative gaps
- Wound care membranes containing storax oil (Liquidambar orientalis miller) and absorbent materials fabricated by blend electrospinning (2026) · doi
The paper does not explicitly discuss in-vivo wound healing studies; validation in animal or human models is needed beyond in-vitro assays.
Keywords: explicitly discuss vivo wound healing validation animal human models needed beyond vitro assays - MiR-362-3p inhibits the proliferation, migration and EMT of gastric cancer cells by regulating the DEP-1/ERK signaling pathway (2026) · doi
A limitation of our study is the lack of in vivo validation using animal models.
Keywords: limitation lack vivo validation using animal models
Working on this gap? Publish with us.
Science AI Journal reviews manuscripts in under 15 minutes with 8 specialised AI reviewers calibrated on 23,000+ real peer reviews. Open access, CC BY 4.0.
Related gaps in medicine
- Diagnostic and Prognostic MarkersFurther validation is needed to establish standardized criteria for MRI and sonoelastography in differentiating phyllodes tumors from fibroa…
- Research Method ValidationFurther validation of AI systems and biomarkers is needed across diverse clinical settings and patient populations to ensure safe and effect…
- Validation Across ConditionsFurther studies are needed to confirm the reproducibility and effectiveness of proposed methods under different conditions, including full-s…
- Generalizability of FindingsMost studies lack external validation in diverse populations or settings, questioning the generalizability of their findings.