ReviewCold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology2022
Quantifying Sex Differences in Behavior in the Era of "Big" Data.
Review in Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Data-Driven Analysis Identifies Novel Modulation of Social Behavior in Female Mice Witnessing Chronic Social Defeat Stress.Biological psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sex differences are commonly observed in behaviors that are closely linked to adaptive function, but sex differences can also be observed in behavioral "building blocks" such as locomotor activity and reward processing. Modern neuroscientific inquiry, in pursuit of generalizable principles of functioning across sexes, has often ignored these more subtle sex differences in behavioral building blocks that may result from differences in these behavioral building blocks. A frequent assumption is that there is a default (often male) way to perform a behavior. This approach misses fundamental drivers of individual variability within and between sexes. Incomplete behavioral descriptions of both sexes can lead to an overreliance on reduced "single-variable" readouts of complex behaviors, the design of which may be based on male-biased samples. Here, we advocate that the incorporation of new machine-learning tools for collecting and analyzing multimodal "big behavior" data allows for a more holistic and richer approach to the quantification of behavior in both sexes. These new tools make behavioral description more robust and replicable across laboratories and species, and may open up new lines of neuroscientific inquiry by facilitating the discovery of novel behavioral states. Having more accurate measures of behavioral diversity in males and females could serve as a hypothesis generator for where and when we should look in the brain for meaningful neural differences.
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.