Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30405363›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroanatomy2018

Cell Densities in the Mouse Brain: A Systematic Review.

Daniel Keller, Csaba Erö, Henry Markram

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroanatomy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 229 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
229citing 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

229 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Localization-driven exchange contrast in diffusion exchange spectroscopy.Journal of magnetic resonance (San Diego, Calif. : 1997) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Prime editing of a pathogenicScience translational medicine · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

169 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

3 authors.

Daniel KellerBlue Brain Project, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland.
Csaba EröBlue Brain Project, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland.
Henry MarkramBlue Brain Project, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mouse brain is the most extensively studied brain of all species. We performed an exhaustive review of the literature to establish our current state of knowledge on cell numbers in mouse brain regions, arguably the most fundamental property to measure when attempting to understand a brain. The synthesized information, collected in one place, can be used by both theorists and experimentalists. Although for commonly-studied regions cell densities could be obtained for principal cell types, overall we know very little about how many cells are present in most brain regions and even less about cell-type specific densities. There is also substantial variation in cell density values obtained from different sources. This suggests that we need a new approach to obtain cell density datasets for the mouse brain.

Indexed as

brain regionscell densitymouse brainstereologywhole-brain atlas

Identifiers

PMID30405363
PMCPMC6205984

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.