Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26072239›Full record

ReviewProgress in brain research2015

The mammillary bodies and memory: more than a hippocampal relay.

Seralynne D Vann, Andrew J D Nelson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Progress in brain research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing 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

62 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Mislocalization of KCNQ2 Channels as a Pathogenic Mechanism in KCNQ2 Developmental and Epileptic Encephalopathy.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 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

2 authors.

Seralynne D VannSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. Electronic address: vannsd@cardiff.ac.uk.
Andrew J D NelsonSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 090954Wellcome Trust WT090954AIA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the mammillary bodies were one of the first neural structures to be implicated in memory, it has long been assumed that their main function was to act primarily as a hippocampal relay, passing information on to the anterior thalamic nuclei and from there to the cingulate cortex. This view not only afforded the mammillary bodies no independent role in memory, it also neglected the potential significance of other, nonhippocampal, inputs to the mammillary bodies. Recent advances have transformed the picture, revealing that projections from the tegmental nuclei of Gudden, and not the hippocampal formation, are critical for sustaining mammillary body function. By uncovering a role for the mammillary bodies that is independent of its subicular inputs, this work signals the need to consider a wider network of structures that form the neural bases of episodic memory.

Indexed as

AnimalsHippocampusHumansMammillary BodiesMemoryNeural PathwaysAnterograde amnesiaFornixMammillothalamic tractMedial diencephalonPapez circuit

Identifiers

PMID26072239
PMCPMC4498492

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.