Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33054849›Full record

ArticleJournal of ovarian research2020

Comparison of methods for quantifying primordial follicles in the mouse ovary.

Urooza C Sarma, Amy L Winship, Karla J Hutt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Mice lacking NF-ĸB1 undergo premature ovarian aging.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2026
    Article
  4. ReducediScience · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Cell genomics · 2023
    Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Urooza C SarmaDevelopment and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Level 3, Building 76, 19 Innovation walk, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Amy L WinshipDevelopment and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Level 3, Building 76, 19 Innovation walk, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Karla J HuttDevelopment and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Level 3, Building 76, 19 Innovation walk, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia. karla.hutt@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5111-8389
Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute · AUDiscovery Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate evaluation of primordial follicle numbers in mouse ovaries is an essential endpoint for studies investigating how endogenous and exogenous insults, such as maternal aging and chemotherapy, impact the ovarian reserve. In this study, we compared and contrasted two methods for counting healthy primordial follicles following exposure to cyclophosphamide (75 mg/kg), a well-established model of follicle depletion. The first was the fractionator/optical dissector technique, an unbiased, assumption-free stereological approach for quantification of primordial follicle numbers. While accurate, highly reproducible and sensitive, this method relies on specialist microscopy equipment and software, requires specific fixation, embedding and sectioning parameters to be followed, and is largely a manual process that is tedious and time-consuming. The second method was the more widely used serial section and direct count approach, which is relatively quick and easy. We also compared the impacts of different fixatives, embedding material and section thickness on the overall results for each method.

resultsDirect counts resulted in primordial follicle numbers that were significantly lower than those obtained by stereology, irrespective of fixation and embedding material. When applied to formalin fixed tissue, the direct count method did not detect differences in follicle numbers between saline and cyclophosphamide treated groups to the same degree of sensitivity as the gold standard stereology method (referred to as the Reference standard). However, when Bouin's fixative was used, direct counts and stereology were comparable in their ability to detect follicle depletion caused by cyclophosphamide.

conclusionsThis work indicates that the direct count method can produce similar results to stereology when Bouin's fixative is used instead of formalin. The findings presented here will assist others to select the most appropriate experimental approach for accurate follicle enumeration, depending on whether the primary objective of the study is to determine absolute primordial follicle numbers or relative differences between groups.

Indexed as

AnimalsFemaleMiceOvarian FollicleOvaryCounting methodsFollicle countingOvarian reserveOvaryStereology

Identifiers

PMID33054849
PMCPMC7560236
OpenAlexW3092886834

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.