Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30267138›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2018

Indices of comparative cognition: assessing animal models of human brain function.

Sebastian D McBride, A Jennifer Morton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. One Biology and the Status of Humans.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Characterization of the Porcine Cingulate Sulcus Cytoarchitecture.The Journal of comparative neurology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Sebastian D McBrideInstitute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Penglais, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, SY23 3FG, UK. sdm@aber.ac.uk.
A Jennifer MortonDepartment of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the cognitive capacities of animals is important, because (a) several animal models of human neurodegenerative disease are considered poor representatives of the human equivalent and (b) cognitive capacities may provide insight into alternative animal models. We used a three-stage process of cognitive and neuroanatomical comparison (using sheep as an example) to assess the appropriateness of a species to model human brain function. First, a cognitive task was defined via a reinforcement-learning algorithm where values/constants in the algorithm were taken as indirect measures of neurophysiological attributes. Second, cognitive data (values/constants) were generated for the example species (sheep) and compared to other species. Third, cognitive data were compared with neuroanatomical metrics for each species (endocranial volume, gyrification index, encephalisation quotient, and number of cortical neurons). Four breeds of sheep (n = 15/sheep) were tested using the two-choice discrimination-reversal task. The 'reversal index' was used as a measure of constants within the learning algorithm. Reversal index data ranked sheep as third in a table of species that included primates, dogs, and pigs. Across all species, number of cortical neurons correlated strongest against the reversal index (r

Indexed as

Models, AnimalModels, PsychologicalAlgorithmsAnimalsBrainCognitionConditioning, OperantDiscrimination LearningDiscrimination, PsychologicalHumansPsychomotor PerformanceReversal LearningSheepSpecies SpecificityAnimal modelBrainCognitionSheep

Identifiers

PMID30267138
PMCPMC6267686

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.