Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24725531›Full record

ReviewTheoretical biology & medical modelling2014

Cosinor-based rhythmometry.

Germaine Cornelissen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Theoretical biology & medical modelling, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 402 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
402citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

402 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Cut through the noise: vocal signals and auditory processing vary along an urbanization gradient in Pacific treefrogs.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

342 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

1 author.

Germaine CornelissenHalberg Chronobiology Center, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware Street SE, 55455 Minneapolis, MN, USA. corne001@umn.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A brief overview is provided of cosinor-based techniques for the analysis of time series in chronobiology. Conceived as a regression problem, the method is applicable to non-equidistant data, a major advantage. Another dividend is the feasibility of deriving confidence intervals for parameters of rhythmic components of known periods, readily drawn from the least squares procedure, stressing the importance of prior (external) information. Originally developed for the analysis of short and sparse data series, the extended cosinor has been further developed for the analysis of long time series, focusing both on rhythm detection and parameter estimation. Attention is given to the assumptions underlying the use of the cosinor and ways to determine whether they are satisfied. In particular, ways of dealing with non-stationary data are presented. Examples illustrate the use of the different cosinor-based methods, extending their application from the study of circadian rhythms to the mapping of broad time structures (chronomes).

Indexed as

Circadian RhythmHumansLeast-Squares AnalysisModels, Theoretical

Identifiers

PMID24725531
PMCPMC3991883

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.