Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28446581›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2017

Cl

Lintao Qu, Kai Fu, Steven G Shimada, Robert H LaMotte

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lintao QuDepartments of Neurosurgery, Neurosurgery Pain Research Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and lqu4@jhmi.edu.
Kai FuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Steven G ShimadaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Robert H LaMotteDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Yale University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Persistent itch often accompanies allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), but the underlying mechanisms remain largely unexplored. We previously demonstrated that CXCL10/CXCR3 signaling activated a subpopulation of cutaneous primary sensory neurons and mediated itch response after contact hypersensitivity (CHS), a murine model of ACD, induced by squaric acid dibutylester. The purpose of this study was to determine the ionic mechanisms underlying CXCL10-induced neuronal activation and allergic itch. In whole cell recordings, CXCL10 triggered a current in dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons innervating the area of CHS. This current was modulated by intracellular Cl

Indexed as

AnimalsCalciumCells, CulturedChemokine CXCL10Chloride ChannelsChloridesCyclobutanesDermatitis, Allergic ContactDisease Models, AnimalGanglia, SpinalIntracellular SpaceIonsMaleMice, Inbred C57BLNeuronsPruritusCalciumChemokine CXCL10Chloride ChannelsChloridesCxcl10 protein, mouseCxcr3 protein, mouseCyclobutanesIonsReceptors, CXCR3squaric acid dibutyl esterallergic contact dermatitisCl− channelCXCL10CXCR3itchpain

Identifiers

PMID28446581
PMCPMC5511864
OpenAlexW2609668815

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.