Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24263092›Full record

ArticleNature protocols2013

Object recognition test in mice.

Marianne Leger, Anne Quiedeville, Valentine Bouet, Benoît Haelewyn, Michel Boulouard, Pascale Schumann-Bard, Thomas Freret

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature protocols, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 722 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
722citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

722 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Efficacy and possible mechanism ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. ORAI CaScience signaling · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

662 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors.

Marianne Leger1] Groupe Mémoire et Plasticité comportementale (GMPc), Université de Caen Basse-Normandie, Caen, France. [2].
Anne Quiedeville
Valentine Bouet
Benoît Haelewyn
Michel Boulouard
Pascale Schumann-Bard

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The object recognition test is now among the most commonly used behavioral tests for mice. A mouse is presented with two similar objects during the first session, and then one of the two objects is replaced by a new object during a second session. The amount of time taken to explore the new object provides an index of recognition memory. As more groups have used the protocol, the variability of the procedures used in the object recognition test has increased steadily. This protocol provides a necessary standardization of the procedure. This protocol reduces inter-individual variability with the use of a selection criterion based on a minimal time of exploration for both objects during each session. In this protocol, we describe the three most commonly used variants, containing long (3 d), short (1 d) or no habituation phases. Thus, with a short intersession interval (e.g., 6 h), this procedure can be performed in 4, 2 or 1 d, respectively, according to the duration of the habituation phase. This protocol should allow for the comparison of results from different studies, while permitting adaption of the protocol to the constraints of the experimenter.

Indexed as

Recognition, PsychologyAnimalsHabituation, PsychophysiologicHandling, PsychologicalMemoryMiceTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID24263092

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.