ArticleRegenerative medicine
Open-source software to calculate the static sciatic index automatically.
Article in Regenerative medicine. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe static sciatic index is commonly used in rat models of nerve crush injury to quantify functional recovery from new therapies under evaluation. However, it is challenging to standardize these measurements across different investigations, and the process is labor intensive. MATERIAL/
methodsA new machine learning method was previously developed that performs these measurements automatically and consistently. Here, the approach is tested using two data sets that use different experimental setups, and end-user requirements are evaluated.
resultsThe model's outputs presented a nerve regeneration profile comparable to the manual measurements and outperformed the latter by having a much tighter standard deviation (± 5- ± 10 compared to ± 10 - ± 50).
conclusionAn inexpensive automatic tool that can perform functional analysis for nerve repair research was developed and tested. The software is available open source to facilitate its dissemination and use in quantifying recovery from peripheral nerve crush injury.
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.