Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27256552›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neuroscience2016

Over the river, through the woods: cognitive maps in the hippocampus and orbitofrontal cortex.

Andrew M Wikenheiser, Geoffrey Schoenbaum

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 182 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
182citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

182 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Allocentric navigation is computationally universal.Journal of biological physics · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

122 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.

Andrew M WikenheiserIntramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Baltimore, Maryland 21224, USA.
Geoffrey SchoenbaumIntramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Baltimore, Maryland 21224, USA; the Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, USA; and the Department of Neuroscience, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA.

Funding

Associative learning, decision-making, and addictionZIADA000587 · NIDA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE · PI SCHOENBAUM, GEOFFREY · 2012 to 2025
$47.7M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 DA999999Intramural NIH HHS ZIA DA000587
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The hippocampus and the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) both have important roles in cognitive processes such as learning, memory and decision making. Nevertheless, research on the OFC and hippocampus has proceeded largely independently, and little consideration has been given to the importance of interactions between these structures. Here, evidence is reviewed that the hippocampus and OFC encode parallel, but interactive, cognitive 'maps' that capture complex relationships between cues, actions, outcomes and other features of the environment. A better understanding of the interactions between the OFC and hippocampus is important for understanding the neural bases of flexible, goal-directed decision making.

Indexed as

AnimalsCognitionDecision MakingHippocampusHumansLearningMemoryPrefrontal Cortex

Identifiers

PMID27256552
PMCPMC5541258

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.