Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27870449›Full record

ReviewJournal of neuroscience research2017

Do cortical plasticity mechanisms differ between males and females?

James Dachtler, Kevin Fox

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neuroscience research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Sex differences and the neurobiology of affective disorders.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2019
    Review
  13. Exercise and the Aging Brain: Considerations for Sex Differences.Brain plasticity (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2018
    Review
  14. Article
  15. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

James DachtlerDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom.
Kevin FoxSchool of Biosciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2563-112X
Cardiff University · GBDurham University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The difference between male and female behavior and male and female susceptibility to a number of neuropsychiatric conditions is not controversial. From a biological perspective, one might expect to see at least some of these differences underpinned by identifiable physical differences in the brain. This Mini-Review focuses on evidence that plasticity mechanisms differ between males and females and ask at what scale of organization the differences might exist, at the systems level, the circuits level, or the synaptic level. Emerging evidence suggests that plasticity differences may extend to the scale of synaptic mechanisms. In particular, the CaMKK, NOS1 and estrogen receptor pathways show sexual dimorphisms with implications for plasticity in the hippocampus and cerebral cortex. © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Neuroscience Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Indexed as

Sex CharacteristicsAnimalsCerebral CortexFemaleHumansMaleNeuronal PlasticityCaMKKcerebral cortexestrogen receptorhippocampusneuropsychiatric conditionsNOS1

Identifiers

PMID27870449
PMCPMC5111614
OpenAlexW2550379089

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.