Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25856490›Full record

ReviewNeuron2015

Closed-loop and activity-guided optogenetic control.

Logan Grosenick, James H Marshel, Karl Deisseroth

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuron, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 195 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
195citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

195 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Light-field deep learning enables high-throughput, scattering-mitigated calcium imaging.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

135 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

3 authors.

Logan GrosenickDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA; CNC Program, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA; Neurosciences Program, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA.
James H MarshelDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA; CNC Program, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA.
Karl DeisserothDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA; CNC Program, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA; Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA. Electronic address: deissero@stanford.edu.

Funding

CLARITY: fully-assembled biologyR01MH099647 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DEISSEROTH, KARL A. · 2012 to 2016
$23.0M
OPTICAL NEUROMODULATION TECHNOLOGY FOR LONG TIMESCALESR01MH086373 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DEISSEROTH, KARL A. · 2010 to 2025
$9.1M
Structural and molecular identification of circuitry underlying joint processing of motivation and aversionR37DA035377 · NIDA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DEISSEROTH, KARL A. · 2013 to 2022
$6.2M
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in optical manipulation and observation of neural activity have set the stage for widespread implementation of closed-loop and activity-guided optical control of neural circuit dynamics. Closing the loop optogenetically (i.e., basing optogenetic stimulation on simultaneously observed dynamics in a principled way) is a powerful strategy for causal investigation of neural circuitry. In particular, observing and feeding back the effects of circuit interventions on physiologically relevant timescales is valuable for directly testing whether inferred models of dynamics, connectivity, and causation are accurate in vivo. Here we highlight technical and theoretical foundations as well as recent advances and opportunities in this area, and we review in detail the known caveats and limitations of optogenetic experimentation in the context of addressing these challenges with closed-loop optogenetic control in behaving animals.

Indexed as

OptogeneticsAnimalsBehavior, AnimalNerve NetNeurons

Identifiers

PMID25856490
PMCPMC4775736

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.