Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22119142›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in neurobiology2012

The surveillance state of behavioral automation.

Andreas T Schaefer, Adam Claridge-Chang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in neurobiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing 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

45 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Three-Dimensional Pose Estimation for Laboratory Mouse From Monocular Images.IEEE transactions on image processing : a publication of the IEEE Signal Processing Society · 2019
    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

2 authors.

Andreas T SchaeferBehavioural Neurophysiology, Max-Planck-Institute for Medical Research, Jahnstr. 29, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany. schaefer@mpimf-heidelberg.mpg.de
Adam Claridge-Chang

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetics' demand for increased throughput is driving automatization of behavior analysis far beyond experimental workhorses like circadian monitors and the operant conditioning box. However, the new automation is not just faster: it is also allowing new kinds of experiments, many of which erase the boundaries of the traditional neuroscience disciplines (psychology, ethology and physiology) while producing insight into problems that were otherwise opaque. Ironically, a central theme of current automatization is to improve observation of animals in increasingly naturalistic environments. This is not just a return to 19th century priorities: the new observational methods provide unprecedented quantitation of actions and ever-closer integration with experimentation.

Indexed as

AnimalsAutomationBehavior, AnimalHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysNeurophysiology

Identifiers

PMID22119142
PMCPMC3398388

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.