ArticleScientific reports2018
A micro-CT-based method for quantitative brain lesion characterization and electrode localization.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Imaging the structural connectome with hybrid MRI-microscopy tractography.Medical image analysis · 2025Article
- The role of motor cortex in motor sequence execution depends on demands for flexibility.Nature neuroscience · 2024Article
- Dissociating the contributions of sensorimotor striatum to automatic and visually guided motor sequences.Nature neuroscience · 2023Article
- Revealing the three-dimensional murine brain microstructure by contrast-enhanced computed tomography.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Article
- Upscaling X-ray nanoimaging to macroscopic specimens.Journal of applied crystallography · 2021Review
- Illuminating the Brain With X-Rays: Contributions and Future Perspectives of High-Resolution Microtomography to Neuroscience.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Review
- Scalable method for micro-CT analysis enables large scale quantitative characterization of brain lesions and implants.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Tissue Response to Neural Implants: The Use of Model Systems Toward New Design Solutions of Implantable Microelectrodes.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lesion verification and quantification is traditionally done via histological examination of sectioned brains, a time-consuming process that relies heavily on manual estimation. Such methods are particularly problematic in posterior cortical regions (e.g. visual cortex), where sectioning leads to significant damage and distortion of tissue. Even more challenging is the post hoc localization of micro-electrodes, which relies on the same techniques, suffers from similar drawbacks and requires even higher precision. Here, we propose a new, simple method for quantitative lesion characterization and electrode localization that is less labor-intensive and yields more detailed results than conventional methods. We leverage staining techniques standard in electron microscopy with the use of commodity micro-CT imaging. We stain whole rat and zebra finch brains in osmium tetroxide, embed these in resin and scan entire brains in a micro-CT machine. The scans result in 3D reconstructions of the brains with section thickness dependent on sample size (12-15 and 5-6 microns for rat and zebra finch respectively) that can be segmented manually or automatically. Because the method captures the entire intact brain volume, comparisons within and across studies are more tractable, and the extent of lesions and electrodes may be studied with higher accuracy than with current methods.
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.