Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19636974›Full record

ReviewNeuroinformatics2009

On comparing neuronal morphologies with the constrained tree-edit-distance.

Todd A Gillette, John J Grefenstette

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroinformatics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Todd A GilletteCenter for Neural Informatics, Structure, & Plasticity and Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA. tgillett@gmu.edu
John J Grefenstette

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The constrained tree-edit-distance provides a computationally practical method for comparing morphologies directly without first extracting distributions of other metrics. The application of the constrained tree-edit-distance to hippocampal dendrites by Heumann and Wittum is reviewed and considered in the context of other applications and potential future uses. The method has been used on neuromuscular projection axons for comparisons of topology as well as on trees for comparing plant architectures with particular parameter sets that may inform future efforts in comparing dendritic morphologies. While clearly practical on a small scale, testing and extrapolation of run-times raise questions as to the practicality of the constrained tree-edit-distance for large-scale data mining projects. However, other more efficient algorithms may make use of it as a gold standard for direct morphological comparison.

Indexed as

Mathematical ComputingSoftwareAnimalsComputational BiologyComputer SimulationDatabases as TopicDendritesHumansImage CytometryNeuronsSoftware Validation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.