ReviewFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2021
Assessing Impulsivity in Humans and Rodents: Taking the Translational Road.
Review in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Revisiting the Role of Serotonin in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: New Insights from Preclinical and Clinical Studies.Clinical drug investigation · 2025Review
- Individual differences in training time in the rat gambling task are unrelated to subsequent decision-making strategies.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Harmonization of the fastest and densest responses reflects humanlike reaction time in mice.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- How neurobehavior and brain development in alternative whole-organism models can contribute to prediction of developmental neurotoxicity.Neurotoxicology · 2024Review
- Integrating cognition in the laboratory with cognition in the real world: the time cognition takes, task fidelity, and finding tasks when they are mixed together.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
- Environmental uncertainty and the advantage of impulsive choice strategies.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Shaping social behavior in an enriched environment.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Editorial: New advancement in network and path-analysis approaches for the study of disorders within the impulse-compulsive spectrum disorders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- Impulsivity and Compulsivity and Their Relationship with Non-Adherence to Treatment in the Prison Population.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Cell-Type Specific Deletion of CB2 Cannabinoid Receptors in Dopamine Neurons Induced Hyperactivity Phenotype: Possible Relevance to Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Impulsivity is a multidimensional construct encompassing domains of behavioral inhibition as well as of decision making. It is often adaptive and associated with fast responses, being in that sense physiological. However, abnormal manifestations of impulsive behavior can be observed in contexts of drug abuse and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), among others. A number of tools have therefore been devised to assess the different facets of impulsivity in both normal and pathological contexts. In this narrative review, we systematize behavioral and self-reported measures of impulsivity and critically discuss their constructs and limitations, establishing a parallel between assessments in humans and rodents. The first rely on paradigms that are typically designed to assess a specific dimension of impulsivity, within either impulsive action (inability to suppress a prepotent action) or impulsive choice, which implies a decision that weighs the costs and benefits of the options. On the other hand, self-reported measures are performed through questionnaires, allowing assessment of impulsivity dimensions that would be difficult to mimic in an experimental setting (e.g., positive/negative urgency and lack of premeditation) and which are therefore difficult (if not impossible) to measure in rodents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.