Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35658676›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences2022

Neural microprobe modelling and microfabrication for improved implantation and mechanical failure mitigation.

Eve McGlynn, Finlay Walton, Rupam Das, Hadi Heidari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Preface to 'Advanced neurotechnologies: translating innovation for health and well-being'.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2022
    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

4 authors.

Eve McGlynnMicroelectronics Lab (meLAB), James Watt School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6831-081X
Finlay WaltonMicroelectronics Lab (meLAB), James Watt School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4739-1649
Rupam DasMicroelectronics Lab (meLAB), James Watt School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7351-9928
Hadi HeidariMicroelectronics Lab (meLAB), James Watt School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8412-8164

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Careful design and material selection are the most beneficial strategies to ensure successful implantation and mitigate the failure of a neural probe in the long term. In order to realize a fully flexible implantable system, the probe should be easily manipulated by neuroscientists, with the potential to bend up to 90°. This paper investigates the impact of material choice, probe geometry, and crucially, implantation angle on implantation success through finite-element method simulations in

Indexed as

MicrotechnologyPolymersAnimalsBrainPhantoms, ImagingSheepPolymersbrain implantable devicedevice modellingfailure mitigationflexible probepolyimide

Identifiers

PMID35658676
PMCPMC9168446

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.