Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30826849›Full record

ArticlePsychopharmacology2019

An automated home-cage-based 5-choice serial reaction time task for rapid assessment of attention and impulsivity in rats.

B Bruinsma, H Terra, S F de Kloet, A Luchicchi, A J Timmerman, E Remmelink, M Loos, Tommy Pattij, Huibert D Mansvelder

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychopharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

B BruinsmaDepartment of Integrative Neurophysiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research (CNCR), Amsterdam Neuroscience, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
H TerraDepartment of Integrative Neurophysiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research (CNCR), Amsterdam Neuroscience, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
S F de KloetDepartment of Integrative Neurophysiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research (CNCR), Amsterdam Neuroscience, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
A LuchicchiDepartment of Anatomy and Neurosciences, Amsterdam Neuroscience, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
A J TimmermanDepartment of Integrative Neurophysiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research (CNCR), Amsterdam Neuroscience, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
E RemmelinkSylics (Synaptologics B.V.), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M LoosSylics (Synaptologics B.V.), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Tommy PattijDepartment of Anatomy and Neurosciences, Amsterdam Neuroscience, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. t.pattij@vumc.nl.
Huibert D MansvelderDepartment of Integrative Neurophysiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research (CNCR), Amsterdam Neuroscience, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. h.d.mansvelder@vu.nl.
Amsterdam Neuroscience · NLSylics (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

European Research Council Starting GrantNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek vici
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThe 5-choice serial reaction time task (5-CSRTT) is a widely used operant task for measuring attention and motor impulsivity in rodents. Training animals in this task requires an extensive period of daily operant sessions. Recently, a self-paced, automated version of this task has been developed for mice, which substantially reduces training time. Whether a similar approach is effective for rats is currently unknown.

objectiveHere, we tested whether attention and impulsivity can be assessed in rats with a self-paced version of the 5-CSRTT.

methodsOperant boxes were connected to home-cages with tunnels. Two groups of rats self-paced their training by means of an automated script. The first group of animals was allowed unlimited access (UA) to start trials in the task; for the second group, trial availability was restricted to the first 2.5 h of the dark cycle (TR). Task parameter manipulations, such as variable inter-trial intervals and stimulus durations as well as pharmacological challenges with scopolamine, were tested to validate the task.

resultsSelf-paced training took less than 1 week. Animals in the UA group showed higher levels of omissions compared with the TR group. In both protocols, variable inter-trial intervals increased impulsivity, and variable stimulus durations decreased attentional performance. Scopolamine affected cognitive performance in the TR group only.

conclusionsHome-cage-based training of the 5-CSRTT in rats, especially the TR protocol, presents a valid and fast alternative for measuring attention and impulsivity.

Indexed as

Housing, AnimalAnimalsAttentionChoice BehaviorCholinergic AntagonistsCognitionConditioning, OperantImpulsive BehaviorMaleRatsRats, Long-EvansReaction TimeScopolamineTime FactorsCholinergic AntagonistsScopolamine5-CSRTTAnimal modelAttentionHome-cageImpulsivityRatsScopolamine

Identifiers

PMID30826849
PMCPMC6647605
OpenAlexW2920080369

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.