Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29636589›Full record

ReviewNature nanotechnology2018

Evaluating the potential of using quantum dots for monitoring electrical signals in neurons.

Alexander L Efros, James B Delehanty, Alan L Huston, Igor L Medintz, Mladen Barbic, Timothy D Harris

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature nanotechnology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 123 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Artificial HfONanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Optoelectronic Neural Interfaces Based on Quantum Dots.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2022
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Time for NanoNeuro.Nature methods · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Recent advances in bioelectronics chemistry.Chemical Society reviews · 2020
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alexander L EfrosCenter for Computational Materials Science (6390), US Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA. efros@nrl.navy.mil.
James B DelehantyCenter for Bio/Molecular Science and Engineering (6900), US Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA.
Alan L HustonOptical Sciences Division (5611), US Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA.
Igor L MedintzCenter for Bio/Molecular Science and Engineering (6900), US Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA.
Mladen BarbicApplied Physics and Instrumentation Group, Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, VA, USA.
Timothy D HarrisApplied Physics and Instrumentation Group, Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, VA, USA. harrist@janelia.hhmi.org.ORCID 0000-0002-6289-4439
United States Naval Research Laboratory · USHoward Hughes Medical Institute · USOptical Sciences (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Success in the projects aimed at providing an advanced understanding of the brain is directly predicated on making critical advances in nanotechnology. This Perspective addresses the unique interface of neuroscience and nanomaterials by considering the foundational problem of sensing neuron membrane voltage and offers a potential solution that may be facilitated by a prototypical nanomaterial. Despite substantial improvements, the visualization of instantaneous voltage changes within individual neurons, whether in cell culture or in vivo, at both the single-cell and network level at high speed remains complex and problematic. The unique properties of semiconductor quantum dots (QDs) have made them powerful fluorophores for bioimaging. What is not widely appreciated, however, is that QD photoluminescence is exquisitely sensitive to proximal electric fields. This property should be suitable for sensing voltage changes that occur in the active neuronal membrane. Here, we examine the potential role of QDs in addressing the important challenge of real-time optical voltage imaging.

Indexed as

AnimalsCalcium SignalingElectricityFluorescence Resonance Energy TransferFluorescent DyesHumansLuminescenceMembrane PotentialsNeuronsOptical ImagingQuantum DotsFluorescent Dyes

Identifiers

PMID29636589
OpenAlexW2796588284

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.