ArticleJournal of anatomy2023
Individual differences, missing sulci, and nomenclature: A comment on "On presentation of the human cerebral sulci from inside the cerebrum".
Article in Journal of anatomy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
An average hemisphere of the human cerebral cortex contains over 100 individual folds (sulci). Many of these sulci have been overlooked by classic and modern atlases and neuroimaging tools. These sulci also show prominent individual differences: They can be broken into variable "complexes" and some sulci may not be present altogether.
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.