ArticleNeurology international2022
Selection of Mice for Object Permanence Cognitive Task Solution.
Article in Neurology international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Object Permanence Cognitive Task Solution Using Wild Rodents.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- The cost of language: functionally over-dominant language circuits in the human brain may limit cognitive abilities and non-verbal executive functions.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 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
The selection of mice for high ("plus") and low ("minus") scores in the puzzle-box test was performed over five generations. This test evaluates the success (or failure) in finding the underpass, leading to the dark part of the box, when it is blocked. This means that the mouse is either able or unable to operate the "object permanence rule" (one of the index's cognitive abilities). For the "+" strain, animals were bred who solved the test when the underpass test blocked with a plug; the "-" strain comprised those who were unable to solve this task. In mice of the "+" strain, the proportion of animals that was able to solve "plug" stages of the test was higher than in the "-" strain and in the non-selected genetically heterogeneous population. The "+" mice ate significantly more new food in the hyponeophagia test. Animals of both strains demonstrated the ability to "manipulate" the plug blocking the underpass, touching the plug with their paws and muzzle, although the majority of "-" mice were unable to open the underpass effectively. Thus, mice of both selected strains demonstrated that they were able to understand that the underpass does exist, but only "+"-strain animals (at least the majority of them) were able to realize the solution. The selection for plug-stage solution success affected the mouse's ability to open the hidden underpass.
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.