ArticleFrontiers in neuroanatomy2018
Navigating the Murine Brain: Toward Best Practices for Determining and Documenting Neuroanatomical Locations in Experimental Studies.
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 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.
- Considerations and recommendations from the ISMRM diffusion study group for preclinical diffusion MRI: Part 1: In vivo small-animal imaging.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Review
- An extended and improved CCFv3 annotation and Nissl atlas of the entire mouse brain.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Software and pipelines for registration and analyses of rodent brain image data in reference atlas space.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2025Article
- Article
- The Locare workflow: representing neuroscience data locations as geometric objects in 3D brain atlases.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- Radioprotective potential of probiotics against gastrointestinal and neuronal toxicity: a preclinical study.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2023Article
- Review
- AtOM, an ontology model to standardize use of brain atlases in tools, workflows, and data infrastructures.Scientific data · 2023Article
- A Timm-Nissl multiplane microscopic atlas of rat brain zincergic terminal fields and metal-containing glia.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Editorial: What the New White House Rules on Equitable Access Mean for the Neurosciences.Neuroinformatics · 2023Article
- A neuroscientist's guide to using murine brain atlases for efficient analysis and transparent reporting.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2023Article
- Pursuit of precision medicine: Systems biology approaches in Alzheimer's disease mouse models.Neurobiology of disease · 2021Review
- Densities and numbers of calbindin and parvalbumin positive neurons across the rat and mouse brain.iScience · 2021Article
- Neurons in the Intermediate Reticular Nucleus Coordinate Postinspiratory Activity, Swallowing, and Respiratory-Sympathetic Coupling in the Rat.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2019Article
- Enhanced and unified anatomical labeling for a common mouse brain atlas.Nature communications · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In experimental neuroscientific research, anatomical location is a key attribute of experimental observations and critical for interpretation of results, replication of findings, and comparison of data across studies. With steadily rising numbers of publications reporting basic experimental results, there is an increasing need for integration and synthesis of data. Since comparison of data relies on consistently defined anatomical locations, it is a major concern that practices and precision in the reporting of location of observations from different types of experimental studies seem to vary considerably. To elucidate and possibly meet this challenge, we have evaluated and compared current practices for interpreting and documenting the anatomical location of measurements acquired from murine brains with different experimental methods. Our observations show substantial differences in approach, interpretation and reproducibility of anatomical locations among reports of different categories of experimental research, and strongly indicate that ambiguous reports of anatomical location can be attributed to missing descriptions. Based on these findings, we suggest a set of minimum requirements for documentation of anatomical location in experimental murine brain research. We furthermore demonstrate how these requirements have been applied in the EU Human Brain Project to optimize workflows for integration of heterogeneous data in common reference atlases. We propose broad adoption of some straightforward steps for improving the precision of location metadata and thereby facilitating interpretation, reuse and integration of data.
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.