Cited by 644Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsVagus Nerve Stimulation Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 231 of the 231 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Glial responses to implanted electrodes in the brain

Open access

Abstract

The use of implants that can electrically stimulate or record electrophysiological or neurochemical activity in nervous tissue is rapidly expanding. Despite remarkable results in clinical studies and increasing market approvals, the mechanisms underlying the therapeutic effects of neuroprosthetic and neuromodulation devices, as well as their side effects and reasons for their failure, remain poorly understood. A major assumption has been that the signal-generating neurons are the only important target cells of neural-interface technologies. However, recent evidence indicates that the supporting glial cells remodel the structure and function of neuronal networks and are an effector of stimulation-based therapy. Here, we reframe the traditional view of glia as a passive barrier, and discuss their role as an active determinant of the outcomes of device implantation. We also discuss the implications that this has on the development of bioelectronic medical devices.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41551-017-0154-1

Cites

231 of 231 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 231 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Humphrey, D. R. & Schmidt, E. M. in Neurophysiological Techniques Vol. II (eds Boulton, A. A., Baker, G. B. & Vanderwolf, C. H.) 1–64 (Humana Press, New York, 1990).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 644

Metadata

Authors
Salatino, J. W., Ludwig, K. A., Kozai, T. D. Y., & Purcell, E. K.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Purcell, Erin K.
Venue
Nature Biomedical Engineering
Published
2017-11-10
Volume
1
Issue
11
Pages
862-877
ISSN
2157-846X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2765960015
Cited by
642
References
231
Citations by year
2026: 77 · 2025: 110 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 95 · 2022: 68 · 2021: 76 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 1
FWCI
16.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Biomedical Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Grainger Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R03NS095202, R21NS094900, R01NS094396)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research
Keywords
glial cells, implanted electrodes, neuroprosthetics, neuromodulation, neural interfaces, device implantation outcomes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review