ArticleScientific data2022
Standard metadata for 3D microscopy.
Article in Scientific data, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence and practices of immunofluorescent cell image processing: a systematic review.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2023Pooled it
- Organoid Intelligent Morphomics: Decoding the organoid morphome through artificial intelligence from phenotypic quantification to mechanistic insight.Bioactive materials · 2027Review
- Data Management Workflow for FAIR Sharing of Bioimaging Datasets in Plasma Medicine.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Artificial Neural Networks for Bioimage Analysis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Article
- A Photomicrographic Dataset of Rocks for the Accurate Classification of Minerals.Scientific data · 2025Article
- A guide to developing harmonized research workflows in a team science context.Experimental neurology · 2025Review
- Article
- The Brain Image Library: A Community-Contributed Microscopy Resource for Neuroscientists.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Article
- Editorial: On the Economics of Neuroscientific Data Sharing.Neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- T-CLEARE: a pilot community-driven tissue clearing protocol repository.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Big data in contemporary electron microscopy: challenges and opportunities in data transfer, compute and management.Histochemistry and cell biology · 2023Review
- A guide to the BRAIN Initiative Cell Census Network data ecosystem.PLoS biology · 2023Article
- The past, present and future of neuroscience data sharing: a perspective on the state of practices and infrastructure for FAIR.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2023Review
- Microscopy-BIDS: An Extension to the Brain Imaging Data Structure for Microscopy Data.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent advances in fluorescence microscopy techniques and tissue clearing, labeling, and staining provide unprecedented opportunities to investigate brain structure and function. These experiments' images make it possible to catalog brain cell types and define their location, morphology, and connectivity in a native context, leading to a better understanding of normal development and disease etiology. Consistent annotation of metadata is needed to provide the context necessary to understand, reuse, and integrate these data. This report describes an effort to establish metadata standards for three-dimensional (3D) microscopy datasets for use by the Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies® (BRAIN) Initiative and the neuroscience research community. These standards were built on existing efforts and developed with input from the brain microscopy community to promote adoption. The resulting 3D Microscopy Metadata Standards (3D-MMS) includes 91 fields organized into seven categories: Contributors, Funders, Publication, Instrument, Dataset, Specimen, and Image. Adoption of these metadata standards will ensure that investigators receive credit for their work, promote data reuse, facilitate downstream analysis of shared data, and encourage collaboration.
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.