ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2019
Quantifying How Staining Methods Bias Measurements of Neuron Morphologies.
Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence and practices of immunofluorescent cell image processing: a systematic review.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2023Pooled it
- Hyperdynamic microtubule-based structural changes in Monocyte-Derived-Neuronal-like cells from patients with schizophrenia.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- A deep learning pipeline for accurate and automated restoration, segmentation, and quantification of dendritic spines.Cell reports methods · 2025Article
- Accelerating the continuous community sharing of digital neuromorphology data.FASEB bioAdvances · 2024Article
- Exploring the relationship between epigenetic DNA methylation and cardiac fibrosis through Raman microspectroscopy.American journal of physiology. Cell physiology · 2023Article
- Comparisons of quantitative approaches for assessing microglial morphology reveal inconsistencies, ecological fallacy, and a need for standardization.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of Golgi-Cox and Intracellular Loading of Lucifer Yellow for Dendritic Spine Density and Morphology Analysis in the Mouse Brain.Neuroscience · 2022Article
- Comprehensive Estimates of Potential Synaptic Connections in Local Circuits of the Rodent Hippocampal Formation by Axonal-Dendritic Overlap.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- A Systematic Evaluation of Interneuron Morphology Representations for Cell Type Discrimination.Neuroinformatics · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The process through which neurons are labeled is a key methodological choice in measuring neuron morphology. However, little is known about how this choice may bias measurements. To quantify this bias we compare the extracted morphology of neurons collected from the same rodent species, experimental condition, gender distribution, age distribution, brain region and putative cell type, but obtained with 19 distinct staining methods. We found strong biases on measured features of morphology. These were largest in features related to the coverage of the dendritic tree (e.g., the total dendritic tree length). Understanding measurement biases is crucial for interpreting morphological 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.