Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7044812›Full record

ReviewExperientia1982

Techniques and applications of extracellular space determination in mammalian tissues.

R O Law

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Experientia, 1982. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Brain physiome: A concept bridgingBioactive materials · 2022
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Intracellular pH in hibernation and respiratory acidosis in the European hamster.Journal of comparative physiology. B, Biochemical, systemic, and environmental physiology · 1985
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Estimation of hepatic distributional volumes using non-labeled reference markers.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics
    Article
  13. 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

1 author.

R O Law

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review summarizes the ways in which the extracellular space (ECS) may be estimated in mammalian tissues, and briefly describes some of the uses to which the EC confinement of certain molecules (markers or tracers) may be put in the elucidation of physiological functions. The introductory section is followed by a description of the more commonly used marker molecules and their functional characteristics, and of factors likely to lead to the spurious over- or under-estimation of the ECS. Certain alternative methods are also described, in particular those based on morphological and electrical criteria which seek to demonstrate small, functionally important, changes in the size of specialized regions of the ECS (e.g. lateral cellular interspaces) without necessarily being required to provide a quantitatively precise estimate of their size. Section III describes the results of measurements of ECS in various mammalian tissues (muscle, gastro-intestinal tract, nervous tissue, crystalline lens, placenta, lung and kidney) and some applications of EC markers to investigation of cellular function (e.g. uptake of metabolic substrates and epithelial transport) and, in outline, characterization of capillary permeability. The available literature in this field is very extensive, and in the interests of brevity the reader is, where appropriate, referred to previous reviews covering specialized aspects of ECS determination and related topics.

Indexed as

AnimalsDiaphragmEvaluation Studies as TopicExtracellular SpaceFemaleGastric MucosaHumansIntestinesKidneyLiverLungMethodsMusclesMuscle, Smooth, VascularMyocardiumMyometrium

Identifiers

PMID7044812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.