Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21808625›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2011

Technical and conceptual considerations for performing and interpreting functional MRI studies in awake rats.

Marcelo Febo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Where do we stand on fMRI in awake mice?Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Reducing Senescent Cell Burden in Aging and Disease.Trends in molecular medicine · 2020
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

1 author.

Marcelo FeboDepartment of Psychiatry, The McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida College of Medicine Gainesville, FL, USA.

Funding

Brain Imaging of Cocaine and Maternal RewardR01DA019946 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI FEBO, MARCELO · 2007 to 2011
$1.6M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA019946
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional neuroimaging studies in rodents have the potential to provide insight into neurodevelopmental and psychiatric conditions. The strength of the technique lies in its non-invasive nature that can permit longitudinal functional studies in the same animal over its adult life. The relatively good spatial and temporal resolution and the ever-growing database on the biological and biophysical basis of the blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) signal make it a unique technique in preclinical neuroscience research. Our laboratory has used imaging to investigate brain activation in awake rats following cocaine administration and during the presentation of lactation-associated sensory stimuli. Factors that deserve attention when planning functional magnetic resonance imaging studies in rats include technical issues, animal physiology and interpretability of the resulting data. The present review discusses the pros and cons of animal imaging with a particular focus on the technical aspects of studies with awake rats. Overall, the benefits of the technique outweigh its limitations and the rapidly evolving methods will open the way for more laboratories to employ the technique in neuroscience research.

Indexed as

anesthesiaawake rat imagingfMRImotion artifactneural circuitsneuroimagingratsstress

Identifiers

PMID21808625
PMCPMC3137945

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.