MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039360849 · doi:10.1002/dev.20403

Sexually dimorphic effects of postnatal treatment on the development of activity‐based anorexia in adolescent and adult rats

2009· article· en· W2039360849 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Hancock, Virginia L. Grant

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Psychobiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnorexia nervosaAnorexiaPsychologyEndocrinologyInternal medicineAnimal modelAffect (linguistics)PhysiologyDevelopmental psychologyEating disordersMedicinePsychiatryCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hyperactivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis is a marked feature of anorexia nervosa. Using a modified version of the activity-based animal model of anorexia nervosa, we examine whether factors known to affect HPA axis activity influence the development of activity-based anorexia (ABA). Male and female rats were subjected to maternal separation or handling procedures during the first two postnatal weeks and tested in a mild version of the ABA paradigm, comprised of 2-hr daily running wheel access followed by 1-hr food access, either in adolescence or adulthood. Compared to handled females, maternally separated females demonstrated greater increases in wheel running and a more pronounced running-induced suppression of food intake during adolescence, but not in adulthood. In contrast, it was only in adulthood that wheel running produced more prolonged anorexic effects in maternally separated than in handled males. These findings highlight the interplay between early postnatal treatment, sex of the animal, and developmental age on running, food intake, and rate of body weight loss in a mild version of the ABA paradigm.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental PsychobiologySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207