Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20607469›Full record

ReviewNeurotoxicity research2011

Critical age windows for neurodevelopmental psychiatric disorders: evidence from animal models.

Eva M Marco, Simone Macrì, Giovanni Laviola

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neurotoxicity research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing 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

59 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Use of Compounds Derived fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  7. Individual and joint effects of prenatal PMEnvironmental research · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Association between prenatal and childhood PMEnvironmental epidemiology (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. What's wrong with my experiment?: The impact of hidden variables on neuropsychopharmacology research.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors.

Eva M MarcoSection of Behavioural Neuroscience, Department of Cell Biology and Neurosciences, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Simone Macrì
Giovanni Laviola

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A disruption in normal brain development has been hypothesized to contribute to the aetiology of major psychiatric disorders. According to the 'double-hit' hypothesis, mutant genes-based deviations, associated with specific environmental insults during brain development, may result in neurobehavioural disturbances. The existence of age windows of vulnerability to environmental conditions during brain maturation will be discussed, using as examples a series of studies we have performed during the last years. Major deviations from normative neurobehavioural trajectories have been reported in animal models following exposure to severe stress (either episodes of maternal separation, deprivation or corticosterone supplementation) early in infancy. Rodent models of difficult and/or stressful pregnancies, including obstetric complications (e.g. prenatal restrain stress or neonatal hypoxia) and gestational exposure to infection (e.g prenatal immune challenge), have been associated with profound long-lasting deficits in the offspring's emotional and social behaviour, and with immune and endocrine changes. More recently, adolescence, characterized by elevated rates of brain plasticity, has emerged as an additional period during which sensitivity to environmental influence (either adverse or stimulatory) is maximal. We have reported that both pharmacological (methylphenidate) and environmental (physical or social enrichment) interventions can be used to counteract the detrimental effects of earlier-origin developmental insults. Present findings indicate that these age periods (i.e. prenatal stage, early infancy and adolescence) do represent critical windows open to plastic changes and might be susceptible to both adverse and supportive shaping environmental forces. Taken together, age-related neuroplasticity might be considered not only as a risk factor for psychopathology but also as a potent mechanism for compensation. A better understanding of these critical periods of brain development is a concern for public health and may provide new insights into prevention strategies and into novel therapeutic approaches in neuropsychiatry.

Indexed as

Critical Period, PsychologicalDisease Models, AnimalAge FactorsAnimalsEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansMental DisordersPregnancyPrenatal Exposure Delayed EffectsRisk FactorsStress, Psychological

Identifiers

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.