Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8968726›Full record

ReviewThe Histochemical journal1996

Autoradiographical and immunohistochemical analysis of receptor localization in the central nervous system.

J G Chabot, S Kar, R Quirion

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Histochemical journal, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. G Protein-Coupled Receptor Heteromers.Annual review of pharmacology and toxicology · 2016
    Review
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

3 authors.

J G ChabotDouglas Hospital Research Centre, Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Quebec, Canada.
S Kar
R Quirion

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative receptor autoradiographic methods have been widely used over the past two decades. Some of the advantages and limitations of these techniques are reviewed here. Comparison with immunohistochemical and in situ hybridization methods is also highlighted, as well as the use of these approaches to study receptor gene over-expression in cell lines. Together, data obtained using these various methodologies can provide unique information on the potential physiological roles of a given receptor protein and/or binding sites in various tissues.

Indexed as

AnimalsAutoradiographyCentral Nervous SystemIn Situ HybridizationReceptor, Muscarinic M1Receptor, Muscarinic M3Receptor, Muscarinic M4Receptors, Cell SurfaceReceptors, MuscarinicReceptors, Neuropeptide YRNA, Messengerneuropeptide Y-Y1 receptorReceptor, Muscarinic M1Receptor, Muscarinic M3Receptor, Muscarinic M4Receptors, Cell SurfaceReceptors, MuscarinicReceptors, Neuropeptide YRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID8968726

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.