ArticleFrontiers in neuroanatomy2020
Neuronize v2: Bridging the Gap Between Existing Proprietary Tools to Optimize Neuroscientific Workflows.
Article in Frontiers in neuroanatomy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-dimensional infection network analysis in maize reveals variation in fungal colonization associated with lesion phenotypes.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Mouse and human striatal projection neurons compared - somatodendritic arbor, spines and in silico analyses.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Synthesis of geometrically realistic and watertight neuronal ultrastructure manifolds for in silico modeling.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Actin nano-architecture of phagocytic podosomes.Nature communications · 2022Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Knowledge about neuron morphology is key to understanding brain structure and function. There are a variety of software tools that are used to segment and trace the neuron morphology. However, these tools usually utilize proprietary formats. This causes interoperability problems since the information extracted with one tool cannot be used in other tools. This article aims to improve neuronal reconstruction workflows by facilitating the interoperability between two of the most commonly used software tools-Neurolucida (NL) and Imaris (Filament Tracer). The new functionality has been included in an existing tool-Neuronize-giving rise to its second version. Neuronize v2 makes it possible to automatically use the data extracted with Imaris Filament Tracer to generate a tracing with dendritic spine information that can be read directly by NL. It also includes some other new features, such as the ability to unify and/or correct inaccurately-formed meshes (i.e., dendritic spines) and to calculate new metrics. This tool greatly facilitates the process of neuronal reconstruction, bridging the gap between existing proprietary tools to optimize neuroscientific workflows.
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.