Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33772712›Full record

ArticleCognitive processing2021

Effects of prepulse format and lead interval on the assessment of automatic and attention-modulated prepulse inhibition.

Albert B Poje, Diane L Filion

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive processing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Albert B PojeDivision of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Blvd., Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA. apoje@kumc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4443-8875
Diane L FilionDepartment of Psychology, University of Missouri - Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, 64110, USA.
University of Kansas Medical Center · USUniversity of Missouri–Kansas City · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prepulse inhibition (PPI) of the acoustic startle response can index automatic and attention-modulated aspects of sensorimotor gating. Automatic sensorimotor gating is typically assessed by a no-task PPI protocol in which participants are presented with discrete white noise prepulse and startle stimuli over continuous background broadband noise at brief short-lead intervals (e.g., 60-120 ms). In contrast, attention-modulated sensorimotor gating is typically assessed through a task-based PPI protocol using continuous format pure tone prepulses and white noise startle stimuli presented over an ambient background at a lead interval of 120 ms. The present study sought to test the extent that the assessment of attention-modulated PPI is dependent on prepulse type and lead interval across two experiments. Experiment 1 assessed attention effects on PPI produced by discrete prepulses at lead intervals of 60 and 120 ms. Experiment 2 examined attention effects on PPI with matched stimulus conditions apart from continuous prepulses. Results indicated that the use of discrete prepulses failed to elicit attentional-modulation of PPI and that assessment therein was dependent on the use of continuous prepulses at a lead interval of 120 ms. These results highlight additional methods to concurrently assess automatic and attention-modulated PPI in a single testing session using a task-based tone counting task.

Indexed as

Prepulse InhibitionReflex, StartleAcoustic StimulationAttentionHumansSensory GatingAttentionPrepulse inhibition (PPI)Prepulse stimuliSensorimotor gating

Identifiers

PMID33772712
OpenAlexW3146198571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.