ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2018
Challenges in Reproducibility, Replicability, and Comparability of Computational Models and Tools for Neuronal and Glial Networks, Cells, and Subcellular Structures.
Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cell-based therapies of autoimmune diseases in the context of artificial intelligence development.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- A multimodal spatial atlas of transcriptomic, morphological, and electrophysiological cell type densities in the mouse brain.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Modeling neuron-astrocyte interactions in neural networks using distributed simulation.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Metadata practices for simulation workflows.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Epihiper-A high performance computational modeling framework to support epidemic science.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Neuron-Glial Interactions: Implications for Plasticity, Behavior, and Cognition.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Review
- Analysis of Network Models with Neuron-Astrocyte Interactions.Neuroinformatics · 2023Article
- Editorial: Reproducibility in neuroscience.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2023Article
- High-throughput formation and image-based analysis of basal-in mammary organoids in 384-well plates.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Neuron-Glia Interactions and Brain Circuits.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Creative Destruction: A Basic Computational Model of Cortical Layer Formation.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2021Article
- Astrocyte-mediated spike-timing-dependent long-term depression modulates synaptic properties in the developing cortex.PLoS computational biology · 2020Article
- Article
- Unique Features of Network Bursts Emerge From the Complex Interplay of Excitatory and Inhibitory Receptors in Rat Neocortical Networks.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2019Article
- Code Generation in Computational Neuroscience: A Review of Tools and Techniques.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The possibility to replicate and reproduce published research results is one of the biggest challenges in all areas of science. In computational neuroscience, there are thousands of models available. However, it is rarely possible to reimplement the models based on the information in the original publication, let alone rerun the models just because the model implementations have not been made publicly available. We evaluate and discuss the comparability of a versatile choice of simulation tools: tools for biochemical reactions and spiking neuronal networks, and relatively new tools for growth in cell cultures. The replicability and reproducibility issues are considered for computational models that are equally diverse, including the models for intracellular signal transduction of neurons and glial cells, in addition to single glial cells, neuron-glia interactions, and selected examples of spiking neuronal networks. We also address the comparability of the simulation results with one another to comprehend if the studied models can be used to answer similar research questions. In addition to presenting the challenges in reproducibility and replicability of published results in computational neuroscience, we highlight the need for developing recommendations and good practices for publishing simulation tools and computational models. Model validation and flexible model description must be an integral part of the tool used to simulate and develop computational models. Constant improvement on experimental techniques and recording protocols leads to increasing knowledge about the biophysical mechanisms in neural systems. This poses new challenges for computational neuroscience: extended or completely new computational methods and models may be required. Careful evaluation and categorization of the existing models and tools provide a foundation for these future needs, for constructing multiscale models or extending the models to incorporate additional or more detailed biophysical mechanisms. Improving the quality of publications in computational neuroscience, enabling progressive building of advanced computational models and tools, can be achieved only through adopting publishing standards which underline replicability and reproducibility of research results.
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.