ArticlePhysiological reports2023
Comparative evaluation of glomerular morphometric techniques reveals differential technical artifacts between focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and normal glomeruli.
Article in Physiological reports, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Label-free multimodal optical biopsy reveals biomolecular and morphological features of diabetic kidney tissue in 2D and 3D.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Label-Free Optical Biopsy Reveals Biomolecular and Morphological Features of Diabetic Kidney Tissue in 2D and 3D.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Comparative evaluation of glomerular morphometric techniques reveals differential technical artifacts between focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and normal glomeruli.Physiological reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Morphometric estimates of mean or individual glomerular volume (MGV, IGV) have biological implications, over and above qualitative histologic data. However, morphometry is time-consuming and requires expertise limiting its utility in clinical cases. We evaluated MGV and IGV using plastic- and paraffin-embedded tissue from 10 control and 10 focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) mice (aging and 5/6th nephrectomy models) using the gold standard Cavalieri (Cav) method versus the 2-profile and Weibel-Gomez (WG) methods and a novel 3-profile method. We compared accuracy, bias and precision, and quantified results obtained when sampling differing numbers of glomeruli. In both FSGS and controls, we identified an acceptable precision for MGV of 10-glomerular sampling versus 20-glomerular sampling using the Cav method, while 5-glomerular sampling was less precise. In plastic tissue, 2- or 3-profile MGVs showed greater concordance with MGV when using Cav, versus MGV with WG. IGV comparisons using the same glomeruli reported a consistent underestimation bias with both 2- or 3-profile methods versus the Cav method. FSGS glomeruli showed wider variations in bias estimation than controls. Our 3-profile method offered incremental benefit to the 2-profile method in both IGV and MGV estimation (improved correlation coefficient, Lin's concordance and reduced bias). In our control animals, we quantified a shrinkage artifact of 52% from tissue processed for paraffin-embedded versus plastic-embedded tissue. FSGS glomeruli showed overall reduced shrinkage albeit with variable artifact signifying periglomerular/glomerular fibrosis. A novel 3-profile method offers slightly improved concordance with reduced bias versus 2-profile. Our findings have implications for future studies using glomerular morphometry.
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.