Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34099930›Full record

ReviewNature methods2021

Best practices and tools for reporting reproducible fluorescence microscopy methods.

Paula Montero Llopis, Rebecca A Senft, Tim J Ross-Elliott, Ryan Stephansky, Daniel P Keeley, Preman Koshar, Guillermo Marqués, Ya-Sheng Gao, Benjamin R Carlson, Thomas Pengo and 3 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature methods, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Identification of optimal fluorophores for use in theMolecular biology of the cell · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Case Study: Illuminating the Nanoscale World of Microbiology.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

6 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

13 authors.

Paula Montero LlopisMicRoN Core, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. paula_monterollopis@hms.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5983-2296
Rebecca A SenftDepartment of Genetics, Blavatnik Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Tim J Ross-ElliottMicRoN Core, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0991-9588
Ryan StephanskyMicRoN Core, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Daniel P KeeleyNeuroscience Microscopy Core, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Preman KosharNeuroscience Microscopy Core, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7475-652X
Guillermo MarquésUniversity Imaging Centers and Department of Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1478-1955
Ya-Sheng GaoDuke Light Microscopy Core Facility, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Benjamin R CarlsonDuke Light Microscopy Core Facility, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Thomas PengoUniversity of Minnesota Informatics Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9632-918X
Mark A SandersUniversity Imaging Centers and Department of Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7550-5255
Lisa A CameronDuke Light Microscopy Core Facility, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8477-0285
Michelle S ItanoNeuroscience Microscopy Core, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6853-1228

Funding

UNC Neuroscience Center Research Cores: MicroscopyP30NS045892 · NINDS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ZYLKA, MARK J. · 2003 to 2022
$11.5M
Preclinical CoreP50HD103573 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI GABRIEL S DICHTER · 2020 to 2026
$9.7M
Mapping serotonergic neuron subtypes protective for seizure-induced neurological and neurobehavioral changesF31NS108406 · NINDS · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI SENFT, REBECCA ALEXIS · 2018 to 2020
$102k
NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD103573NINDS NIH HHS F31 NS108406NINDS NIH HHS P30 NS045892
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although fluorescence microscopy is ubiquitous in biomedical research, microscopy methods reporting is inconsistent and perhaps undervalued. We emphasize the importance of appropriate microscopy methods reporting and seek to educate researchers about how microscopy metadata impact data interpretation. We provide comprehensive guidelines and resources to enable accurate reporting for the most common fluorescence light microscopy modalities. We aim to improve microscopy reporting, thus improving the quality, rigor and reproducibility of image-based science.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchConvallariaEscherichia coliFluorescent DyesGreen Fluorescent ProteinsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalMicroscopy, ConfocalMicroscopy, FluorescenceReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSignal-To-Noise RatioSoftwareFluorescent DyesGreen Fluorescent Proteins

Identifiers

PMID34099930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.