Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30504438›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of experimental medicine2019

Immune cells and CNS physiology: Microglia and beyond.

Geoffrey T Norris, Jonathan Kipnis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of experimental medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 148 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
148citing 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

148 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Connecting the Dots: AMOG/βInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

88 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.

Geoffrey T NorrisCenter for Brain Immunology and Glia, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA gtn5ff@virginia.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4231-5492
Jonathan KipnisCenter for Brain Immunology and Glia, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA kipnis@virginia.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3714-517X

Funding

Meninges-to-astrocyte communication in cognitive functionR01AG034113 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI KIPNIS, JONATHAN · 2010 to 2019
$3.8M
Immune system supports brain functionR37AG034113 · NIA · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Jonathan Kipnis · 2020 to 2026
$3.7M
Immune Response to CNS InjuryR01NS096967 · NINDS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI KIPNIS, JONATHAN · 2016 to 2020
$1.7M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG034113NIA NIH HHS R37 AG034113NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS096967
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances have directed our knowledge of the immune system from a narrative of "self" versus "nonself" to one in which immune function is critical for homeostasis of organs throughout the body. This is also the case with respect to the central nervous system (CNS). CNS immunity exists in a segregated state, with a marked partition occurring between the brain parenchyma and meningeal spaces. While the brain parenchyma is patrolled by perivascular macrophages and microglia, the meningeal spaces are supplied with a diverse immune repertoire. In this review, we posit that such partition allows for neuro-immune crosstalk to be properly tuned. Convention may imply that meningeal immunity is an ominous threat to brain function; however, recent studies have shown that its presence may instead be a steady hand directing the CNS to optimal performance.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrainHumansMacrophagesMeningesMicroglia

Identifiers

PMID30504438
PMCPMC6314530

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.