Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23525521›Full record

ReviewActa neuropathologica2013

Hand in glove: brain and skull in development and dysmorphogenesis.

Joan T Richtsmeier, Kevin Flaherty

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta neuropathologica, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

131 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 259 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A novel mouse model of rare neurodevelopmental disorder, TBCK Syndrome.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A head start: The relationship of placental factors to craniofacial and brain development.Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Dosage-dependent effects of FGFR2Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2025
    Article
  17. Evolution of the essential geneProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  18. Non-syndromic craniosynostosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joan T RichtsmeierDepartment of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, 409 Carpenter Building, University Park, PA 16802, USA. jta10@psu.edu
Kevin Flaherty
Pennsylvania State University · US

Funding

Midface and Upper Airway in CraniosynostosisR01DE022988 · NIDCR · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI JABS, ETHYLIN WANG, RICHTSMEIER, JOAN THERESE · 2012 to 2016
$3.1M
PHENOGENETICS OF SKULL AND BRAIN INTEGRATION IN CRANIOSYNOSTOSISR01DE018500 · NIDCR · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI RICHTSMEIER, JOAN THERESE · 2008 to 2012
$2.8M
NIDCR NIH HHS 3R01DE018500-02S1NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE018500NIDCR NIH HHS R01DE018500NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE022988NIDCR NIH HHS R01DE022988
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The brain originates relatively early in development from differentiated ectoderm that forms a hollow tube and takes on an exceedingly complex shape with development. The skull is made up of individual bony elements that form from neural crest- and mesoderm-derived mesenchyme that unite to provide support and protection for soft tissues and spaces of the head. The meninges provide a protective and permeable membrane between brain and skull. Across evolutionary and developmental time, dynamic changes in brain and skull shape track one another so that their integration is evidenced in two structures that fit soundly regardless of changes in biomechanical and physiologic functions. Evidence for this tight correspondence is also seen in diseases of the craniofacial complex that are often classified as diseases of the skull (e.g., craniosynostosis) or diseases of the brain (e.g., holoprosencephaly) even when both tissues are affected. Our review suggests a model that links brain and skull morphogenesis through coordinated integration of signaling pathways (e.g., FGF, TGFβ, Wnt) via processes that are not currently understood, perhaps involving the meninges. Differences in the earliest signaling of biological structure establish divergent designs that will be enhanced during morphogenesis. Signaling systems that pattern the developing brain are also active in patterning required for growth and assembly of the skull and some members of these signaling families have been indicated as causal for craniofacial diseases. Because cells of early brain and skull are sensitive to similar signaling families, variation in the strength or timing of signals or shifts in patterning boundaries that affect one system (neural or skull) could also affect the other system and appropriate co-adjustments in development would be made. Interactions of these signaling systems and of the tissues that they pattern are fundamental to the consistent but labile functional and structural association of brain and skull conserved over evolutionary time obvious in the study of development and disease.

Indexed as

BrainHumansMorphogenesisSignal TransductionSkull

Identifiers

PMID23525521
PMCPMC3652528
OpenAlexW2052873380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.