Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37432073›Full record

ArticleeLife2023

Sharing neurophysiology data from the Allen Brain Observatory.

Saskia E J de Vries, Joshua H Siegle, Christof Koch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Neurodatascience: Past, Present, and Future.Data science in science · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Saskia E J de Vries *Allen Institute, Seattle, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3704-3499
Joshua H Siegle *Allen Institute, Seattle, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7736-4844
Christof KochAllen Institute, Seattle, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nullius in verba ('trust no one'), chosen as the motto of the Royal Society in 1660, implies that independently verifiable observations-rather than authoritative claims-are a defining feature of empirical science. As the complexity of modern scientific instrumentation has made exact replications prohibitive, sharing data is now essential for ensuring the trustworthiness of one's findings. While embraced in spirit by many, in practice open data sharing remains the exception in contemporary systems neuroscience. Here, we take stock of the Allen Brain Observatory, an effort to share data and metadata associated with surveys of neuronal activity in the visual system of laboratory mice. Data from these surveys have been used to produce new discoveries, to validate computational algorithms, and as a benchmark for comparison with other data, resulting in over 100 publications and preprints to date. We distill some of the lessons learned about open surveys and data reuse, including remaining barriers to data sharing and what might be done to address these.

Indexed as

NeurophysiologyNeurosciencesAlgorithmsAnimalsBrainMicedata sharingelectrophysiologymouseneurophysiologyneuroscienceopen sciencetwo photon calcium imaging

Identifiers

PMID37432073
PMCPMC10335829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.