Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23376704›Full record

ArticleBehavioural brain research2013

Performance on a strategy set shifting task during adolescence in a genetic model of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: methylphenidate vs. atomoxetine treatments.

Roxann C Harvey, Chloe J Jordan, David H Tassin, Kayla R Moody, Linda P Dwoskin, Kathleen M Kantak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioural brain research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Adolescent atomoxetine treatment in a rodent model of ADHD: effects on cocaine self-administration and dopamine transporters in frontostriatal regions.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2013
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Roxann C HarveyDepartment of Psychology, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Chloe J Jordan
David H Tassin
Kayla R Moody
Linda P Dwoskin
Kathleen M Kantak
Boston University · USUniversity of Kentucky · US

Funding

COGNITIVE ASPECTS OF ADDICTION-RELATED BEHAVIORR01DA011716 · NIDA · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI KANTAK, KATHLEEN M. · 1998 to 2013
$4.8M
NIDA NIH HHS DA011716NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA011716
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research examining medication effects on set shifting in teens with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is lacking. An animal model of ADHD may be useful for exploring this gap. The spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR) is a commonly used animal model of ADHD. SHR and two comparator strains, Wistar-Kyoto (WKY) and Wistar (WIS), were evaluated during adolescence in a strategy set shifting task under conditions of a 0s or 15s delay to reinforcer delivery. The task had three phases: initial discrimination, set shift and reversal learning. Under 0s delays, SHR performed as well as or better than WKY and WIS. Treatment with 0.3mg/kg/day atomoxetine had little effect, other than to modestly increase trials to criterion during set shifting in all strains. Under 15s delays, SHR had longer lever press reaction times, longer latencies to criterion and more trial omissions than WKY during set shifting and reversal learning. These deficits were not reduced systematically by 1.5mg/kg/day methylphenidate or 0.3mg/kg/day atomoxetine. Regarding learning in SHR, methylphenidate improved initial discrimination, whereas atomoxetine improved set shifting but disrupted initial discrimination. During reversal learning, both drugs were ineffective in SHR, and atomoxetine made reaction time and trial omissions greater in WKY. Overall, WIS performance differed from SHR or WKY, depending on phase. Collectively, a genetic model of ADHD in adolescent rats revealed that neither methylphenidate nor atomoxetine mitigated all deficits in SHR during the set shifting task. Thus, methylphenidate or atomoxetine monotherapy may not mitigate all set shift task-related deficits in teens with ADHD.

Indexed as

Adrenergic Uptake InhibitorsAnimalsAtomoxetine HydrochlorideAttention Deficit Disorder with HyperactivityConditioning, OperantDopamine Uptake InhibitorsMaleMethylphenidatePropylaminesRatsReversal LearningSpecies SpecificityTime FactorsAdrenergic Uptake InhibitorsAtomoxetine HydrochlorideDopamine Uptake InhibitorsMethylphenidatePropylamines

Identifiers

PMID23376704
PMCPMC3596456
OpenAlexW2128052118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.