MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2070958613 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0096573

Protracted Effects of Juvenile Stressor Exposure Are Mitigated by Access to Palatable Food

2014· article· en· W2070958613 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer Christine MacKay, Jonathan James, Christian Cayer, Pamela Kent, Hymie Anisman, Zul Merali

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsStressorJuvenileAnxietyBehavioural despair testPhysiologyInternal medicineMedicinePsychologyEndocrinologyBiologyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stressor experiences during the juvenile period may increase vulnerability to anxiety and depressive-like symptoms in adulthood. Stressors may also promote palatable feeding, possibly reflecting a form of self-medication. The current study investigated the short- and long-term consequences of a stressor applied during the juvenile period on anxiety- and depressive-like behavior measured by the elevated plus maze (EPM), social interaction and forced swim test (FST). Furthermore, the effects of stress on caloric intake, preference for a palatable food and indices of metabolic syndrome and obesity were assessed. Male Wistar rats exposed to 3 consecutive days of variable stressors on postnatal days (PD) 27-29, displayed elevated anxiety-like behaviors as adults, which could be attenuated by consumption of a palatable high-fat diet. However, consumption of a palatable food in response to a stressor appeared to contribute to increased adiposity.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicStress Responses and Cortisol→French-language works237,207→