Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29670517›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in computational neuroscience2018

Computational Models for Calcium-Mediated Astrocyte Functions.

Tiina Manninen, Riikka Havela, Marja-Leena Linne

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Context-Dependent modulation of astrocytic CaJournal of computational neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Numerical Simulations and Bifurcation of CaCell biochemistry and biophysics · 2025
    Article
  7. CaFrontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2025
    Review
  8. ACognitive neurodynamics · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Neuron-Glial Interactions: Implications for Plasticity, Behavior, and Cognition.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tiina ManninenComputational Neuroscience Group, BioMediTech Institute and Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Engineering, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland.
Riikka HavelaComputational Neuroscience Group, BioMediTech Institute and Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Engineering, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland.
Marja-Leena LinneComputational Neuroscience Group, BioMediTech Institute and Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Engineering, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland.
Tampere University · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The computational neuroscience field has heavily concentrated on the modeling of neuronal functions, largely ignoring other brain cells, including one type of glial cell, the astrocytes. Despite the short history of modeling astrocytic functions, we were delighted about the hundreds of models developed so far to study the role of astrocytes, most often in calcium dynamics, synchronization, information transfer, and plasticity

Indexed as

astrocyteastrocyte networkcomputational modelgliaintracellular calciumneuron-astrocyte networksimulationsynapse

Identifiers

PMID29670517
PMCPMC5893839
OpenAlexW2796453918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.