Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29709208›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of neuroscience2018

A Guide to Emerging Technologies for Large-Scale and Whole-Brain Optical Imaging of Neuronal Activity.

Siegfried Weisenburger, Alipasha Vaziri

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

62 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Microvascular architecture and physiological fluctuations constrain the control of cerebral microcirculation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Siegfried WeisenburgerLaboratory of Neurotechnology and Biophysics, The Rockefeller University, New York, New York 10065, USA.
Alipasha VaziriLaboratory of Neurotechnology and Biophysics, The Rockefeller University, New York, New York 10065, USA.

Funding

Cortex-wide volumetric imaging of neuronal activity.U01NS103488 · NINDS · ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY · PI VAZIRI, ALIPASHA · 2017 to 2019
$2.7M
High-speed volumetric imaging of neuronal network activity at depth using Multiplexed Scanned Temporal Focusing (MuST)U01NS094263 · NINDS · ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY · PI VAZIRI, ALIPASHA · 2015 to 2017
$2.2M
NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS094263NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS103488
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mammalian brain is a densely interconnected network that consists of millions to billions of neurons. Decoding how information is represented and processed by this neural circuitry requires the ability to capture and manipulate the dynamics of large populations at high speed and high resolution over a large area of the brain. Although the use of optical approaches by the neuroscience community has rapidly increased over the past two decades, most microscopy approaches are unable to record the activity of all neurons comprising a functional network across the mammalian brain at relevant temporal and spatial resolutions. In this review, we survey the recent development in optical technologies for Ca

Indexed as

BrainAnimalsHumansNeural PathwaysNeuronsOptical ImagingCa2+ imagingfunctional brain networkhigh-speed optical neuronal recordinglarge-scale imagingneural circuit dynamicsvolumetric imaging

Identifiers

PMID29709208
PMCPMC6037565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.