ArticlePloS one2025
Technical report: Efficient and accurate assessment of neurite outgrowth in spiral ganglion explants using Sholl analysis and repeated measurement ANOVA.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
Cultivating three-dimensional spiral ganglion explants is a well-established in-vitro assay for assessing the neurotrophic potential of compounds. The manual neurite measurement remains common but hinders high-throughput experimentation. The present study aimed to automate this process, comparing two methods, Sholl and Gray Value analysis, with manual neurite measurement to enhance this time-consuming and labor-intensive evaluation. The explants were cultured with brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), and both neurons and neurites were marked immunohistochemically. The comparison of methods included significance of treatment group differences, accuracy, precision, time and interference. Sholl analysis outperformed manual measurements in time and precision, exhibiting fewer interferences compared to Gray Value analysis. It effectively distinguished between control and BDNF concentrations, paralleling manual tracing outcomes. The Sholl intersections per radius analysis, employing repeated measures (rm) ANOVA across 31 measurement points, exhibited the smallest deviation from manual measurement. Gray Value analysis introduced inner explant brightness as a parameter that parallels neuronal survival within the explant. The present study demonstrates, that Sholl analysis with rm ANOVA emerged as the most efficient, with reduced time and manpower requirements. This positions the improved Sholl analysis as a potent tool for high-throughput, automated assessments of neurotrophic potential, marking a significant advancement in the field.
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.