ArticlePloS one2021
A facile and comprehensive algorithm for electrical response identification in mouse retinal ganglion cells.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- From End to End: Gaining, Sorting, and Employing High-Density Neural Single Unit Recordings.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retinal prostheses can restore the basic visual function of patients with retinal degeneration, which relies on effective electrical stimulation to evoke the physiological activities of retinal ganglion cells (RGCs). Current electrical stimulation strategies have defects such as unstable effects and insufficient stimulation positions, therefore, it is crucial to determine the optimal pulse parameters for precise and safe electrical stimulation. Biphasic voltages (cathode-first) with a pulse width of 25 ms and different amplitudes were used to ex vivo stimulate RGCs of three wild-type (WT) mice using a commercial microelectrode array (MEA) recording system. An algorithm is developed to automatically realize both spike-sorting and electrical response identification for the spike signals recorded. Measured from three WT mouse retinas, the total numbers of RGC units and responsive RGC units were 1193 and 151, respectively. In addition, the optimal pulse amplitude range for electrical stimulation was determined to be 0.43 V-1.3 V. The processing results of the automatic algorithm we proposed shows high consistency with those using traditional manual processing. We anticipate the new algorithm can not only speed up the elaborate electrophysiological data processing, but also optimize pulse parameters for the electrical stimulation strategy of neural prostheses.
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.