ArticleScientific reports2026
A computational analysis of biophysical and geometric constraints refutes existing hypotheses of cross-excitation in dorsal root ganglia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The phenomenon of cross-excitation—interaction between neurons of a dorsal root ganglion (DRG) in intact organism, presents a great challenge since its discovery. It can not be attributed to classical neuron–neuron interactions, as the mentioned neurons are believed to be physiologically isolated by glial sheaths from one another. In this work we test existing hypotheses which explain the phenomenon from both biophysical and statistical perspectives. Our conclusion is that neither each proposed mechanism alone, nor interactions of them can adequately describe cross-excitation in normal conditions. We wish to draw greater attention towards the phenomenon, as it seems to be an important part of normal sensory information processing.
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.