Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28436163›Full record

ReviewAnimal science journal = Nihon chikusan Gakkaiho2017

Social defeat models in animal science: What we have learned from rodent models.

Atsushi Toyoda

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal science journal = Nihon chikusan Gakkaiho, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
13.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Validity of mental and physical stress models.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2024
    Review
  9. Interstitial cystitis-an imbalance of risk and protective factors?Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Effect of ProbioticNutrients · 2022
    Article
  17. Resilience to stress and social touch.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Atsushi ToyodaCollege of Agriculture, Ibaraki University, Ami, Ibaraki, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0245-3244
Tokyo Medical University Ibaraki Medical Center · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies on stress and its impacts on animals are very important in many fields of science, including animal science, because various stresses influence animal production and animal welfare. In particular, the social stresses within animal groups have profound impact on animals, with the potential to induce abnormal behaviors and health problems. In humans, social stress induces several health problems, including psychiatric disorders. In animal stress models, social defeat models are well characterized and used in various research fields, particularly in studies concerning mental disorders. Recently, we have focused on behavior, nutrition and metabolism in rodent models of social defeat to elucidate how social stresses affect animals. In this review, recent significant progress in studies related to animal social defeat models are described. In the field of animal science, these stress models may contribute to advances in the development of functional foods and in the management of animal welfare.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalAnimalsAnimal WelfareDisease Models, AnimalHumansMice, Inbred C57BLMice, Inbred ICRSocial AlienationStress, Psychologicaldepressionfeedmetabolomesocial defeat

Identifiers

PMID28436163
PMCPMC5518448
OpenAlexW2608545681

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.