Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35072761›Full record

ReviewPsychopharmacology2022

Chronic mild stress paradigm as a rat model of depression: facts, artifacts, and future perspectives.

Tatyana Strekalova, Yanzhi Liu, Daniel Kiselev, Sharafuddin Khairuddin, Jennifer Lok Yu Chiu, Justin Lam, Ying-Shing Chan, Dmitrii Pavlov, Andrey Proshin, Klaus-Peter Lesch and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Psychopharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

73 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. New Antidepressant Development in the Treatment of Depression.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

12 authors.

Tatyana StrekalovaDepartment of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands. t.strekalova@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9937-5600
Yanzhi LiuSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Daniel KiselevDepartment of Normal Physiology and Laboratory of Psychiatric Neurobiology, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia.
Sharafuddin KhairuddinSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Jennifer Lok Yu ChiuSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Justin LamSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Ying-Shing ChanSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Dmitrii PavlovInstitute of General Pathology and Pathophysiology, RAS, Moscow, Russia.
Andrey ProshinP.K. Anokhin Research Institute of Normal Physiology, Moscow, Russia.
Klaus-Peter LeschDepartment of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Daniel C AnthonyDepartment of Normal Physiology and Laboratory of Psychiatric Neurobiology, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1380-6655
Lee Wei LimSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong. drlimleewei@gmail.com.

Funding

"5-100" Russian Excellence program 5-100-2016Food and Health Bureau 201604159006Food and Health Bureau 201611159234H2020 European Research Council PhytoAPP, H2020-MSCA-RISE-2020University Research Committee, University of Hong Kong RGC-ECS Grant 27104616
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThe chronic mild stress (CMS) paradigm was first described almost 40 years ago and has become a widely used model in the search for antidepressant drugs for major depression disorder (MDD). It has resulted in the publication of almost 1700 studies in rats alone. Under the original CMS procedure, the expression of an anhedonic response, a key symptom of depression, was seen as an essential feature of both the model and a depressive state. The prolonged exposure of rodents to unpredictable/uncontrollable mild stressors leads to a reduction in the intake of palatable liquids, behavioral despair, locomotor inhibition, anxiety-like changes, and vegetative (somatic) abnormalities. Many of the CMS studies do not report these patterns of behaviors, and they often fail to include consistent molecular, neuroanatomical, and physiological phenotypes of CMS-exposed animals.

objectivesTo critically review the CMS studies in rats so that conceptual and methodological flaws can be avoided in future studies.

resultsAnalysis of the literature supports the validity of the CMS model and its impact on the field. However, further improvements could be achieved by (i) the stratification of animals into 'resilient' and 'susceptible' cohorts within the CMS animals, (ii) the use of more refined protocols in the sucrose test to mitigate physiological and physical artifacts, and (iii) the systematic evaluation of the non-specific effects of CMS and implementation of appropriate adjustments within the behavioral tests.

conclusionsWe propose methodological revisions and the use of more advanced behavioral tests to refine the rat CMS paradigm, which offers a valuable tool for developing new antidepressant medications.

Indexed as

DepressionStress, PsychologicalAnimalsArtifactsDisease Models, AnimalRatsRats, WistarAnhedoniaChronic mild stress (CMS)DepressionForced swimmingInter-individual variabilityOpen fieldRatStress resilienceSucrose test

Identifiers

PMID35072761
PMCPMC8785013

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.