ReviewJournal of neuromuscular diseases2021
Enhancing Interrogation of Skeletal Muscle Samples for Informative Quantitative Data.
Review in Journal of neuromuscular diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Twisting Paths: The Paradox of Fiber Branching in Muscle Regeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Cellular pathogenesis of Duchenne muscular dystrophy: progressive myofibre degeneration, chronic inflammation, reactive myofibrosis and satellite cell dysfunction.European journal of translational myology · 2023Article
- Inhibiting 5-lipoxygenase prevents skeletal muscle atrophy by targeting organogenesis signalling and insulin-like growth factor-1.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Careful quantitative analysis of histological preparations of muscle samples is crucial to accurate investigation of myopathies in man and of interpretation of data from animals subjected to experimental or potentially therapeutic treatments. Protocols for measuring cell numbers are subject to problems arising from biases associated with preparative and analytical techniques. Prominent among these is the effect of polarized structure of skeletal muscle on sampling bias. It is also common in this tissue to collect data as ratios to convenient reference dominators, the fundamental bases of which are ill-defined, or unrecognized or not accurately assessable. Use of such 'floating' denominators raises a barrier to estimation of the absolute values that assume practical importance in medical research, where accurate comparison between different scenarios in different species is essential to the aim of translating preclinical research findings in animal models to clinical utility in Homo sapiens.This review identifies some of the underappreciated problems with current morphometric practice, some of which are exacerbated in skeletal muscle, and evaluates the extent of their intrusiveness into the of building an objective, accurate, picture of the structure of the muscle sample. It also contains recommendations for eliminating or at least minimizing these problems. Principal among these, would be the use of stereological procedures to avoid the substantial counting biases arising from inter-procedure differences in object size and section thickness.Attention is also drawn to the distortions of interpretation arising from use of undefined or inappropriate denominators.
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.