Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25700248›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in neurobiology2015

Molecular dissection of itch.

Mark A Hoon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in neurobiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Serotonergic 5-HTCurrent neuropharmacology · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Molecular Genetics of Kappa Opioids in Pain and Itch Sensations.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2022
    Review
  5. The Spino-Parabrachial Pathway for Itch.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The CysLTProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. TFOS DEWS II pain and sensation report.The ocular surface · 2017
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Mark A HoonMolecular Genetics Unit, Laboratory of Sensory Biology, NIDCR, NIH, Building 35, Room 3F145, 35 Convent Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, United States. Electronic address: mark.hoon@nih.gov.

Funding

Molecular Genetic Studies of SomatosensationZIADE000721 · NIDCR · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DENTAL & CRANIOFACIAL RESEARCH · PI HOON, MARK · 2009 to 2025
$26.6M
Molecular Genetic Studies of SomatosensationZ01DE000721 · NIDCR · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DENTAL & CRANIOFACIAL RESEARCH · PI HOON, MARK · 2007 to 2008
$1.7M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 DE000721Intramural NIH HHS ZIA DE000721
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There have been many exciting recent advances in our understanding of the molecular and cellular basis of itch. These discoveries cover diverse aspects of itch sensation, from the identification of new receptors to the characterization of spinal cord itch circuits. A common thread of these studies is that they demonstrate that itch sensory signals are segregated from input for other somatosensory modalities, such as pain, touch, and thermosensation. This specificity is achieved by the expression of dedicated receptors and transmitters in a select population of sensory neurons which detect pruritogens. Further, recent studies show that itch specificity is maintained in a spinal cord circuit by the utilization of specific neurotransmitters and cognate receptors to convey input along a distinct cellular pathway.

Indexed as

AnimalsDynorphinsHumansPruritusReceptors, CytokineReceptors, G-Protein-CoupledSensory Receptor CellsDynorphinsReceptors, CytokineReceptors, G-Protein-Coupled

Identifiers

PMID25700248
PMCPMC4539294

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.