ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2016
Neurophysiological analytics for all! Free open-source software tools for documenting, analyzing, visualizing, and sharing using electronic notebooks.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thalamocortical bursts encode reward contingencies and drive associative learning.Nature communications · 2026Article
- A tactile discrimination task to study neuronal dynamics in freely-moving mice.Nature communications · 2025Article
- From End to End: Gaining, Sorting, and Employing High-Density Neural Single Unit Recordings.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2022Review
- The role of metadata in reproducible computational research.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Review
- Machine Learning in Modeling of Mouse Behavior.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Implementation and use of cloud-based electronic lab notebook in a bioprocess engineering teaching laboratory.Journal of biological engineering · 2017Article
- Tools and techniques for computational reproducibility.GigaScience · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Neurophysiology requires an extensive workflow of information analysis routines, which often includes incompatible proprietary software, introducing limitations based on financial costs, transfer of data between platforms, and the ability to share. An ecosystem of free open-source software exists to fill these gaps, including thousands of analysis and plotting packages written in Python and R, which can be implemented in a sharable and reproducible format, such as the Jupyter electronic notebook. This tool chain can largely replace current routines by importing data, producing analyses, and generating publication-quality graphics. An electronic notebook like Jupyter allows these analyses, along with documentation of procedures, to display locally or remotely in an internet browser, which can be saved as an HTML, PDF, or other file format for sharing with team members and the scientific community. The present report illustrates these methods using data from electrophysiological recordings of the musk shrew vagus-a model system to investigate gut-brain communication, for example, in cancer chemotherapy-induced emesis. We show methods for spike sorting (including statistical validation), spike train analysis, and analysis of compound action potentials in notebooks. Raw data and code are available from notebooks in data supplements or from an executable online version, which replicates all analyses without installing software-an implementation of reproducible research. This demonstrates the promise of combining disparate analyses into one platform, along with the ease of sharing this work. In an age of diverse, high-throughput computational workflows, this methodology can increase efficiency, transparency, and the collaborative potential of neurophysiological research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.