ArticleCells2025
The
Article in Cells, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dendritic spine formation/maintenance is highly dependent on actin cytoskeletal dynamics, which is regulated by small GTPases Rac1 and Cdc42 through their downstream p21-activated kinase/LIM-kinase-I/cofilin pathway. ARHGEF7, also known as ß-PIX, is a guanine nucleotide exchange factor for Rac1 and Cdc42, thereby activating Rac1/Cdc42 and the downstream pathway, leading to the upregulation of spine formation/maintenance. We found that STIL, one of the primary microcephaly gene products, is associated with ARHGEF7 in dendritic spines and that knockdown of
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.