MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162467131 · doi:10.1002/dev.1047

Effects of chronic and acute methylphenidate hydrochloride (ritalin) administration on locomotor activity, ultrasonic vocalizations, and neuromotor development in 3‐ to 11‐day‐old CD‐1 mouse pups

2001· article· en· W2162467131 on OpenAlexaff
Marsha R. Penner, Melanie P. McFadyen, Normand Carrey, Richard E. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Psychobiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethylphenidateSalineLocomotor activityAnesthesiaPsychologyMedicineInternal medicineAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined the effects of chronic and acute treatment with methylphenidate hydrochloride (Ritalin) on isolation-induced ultrasonic vocalizations, spontaneous locomotor activity, and neuromotor coordination in 3- to 11-day-old CD-1 mouse pups. In Experiment 1, 3- to 11-day-old pups received daily injections of saline, 5 mg/kg or 20 mg/kg of methylphenidate hydrochloride, or no injection and were tested on postnatal Days 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11. Both doses of methylphenidate resulted in significant increases in locomotor activity at all ages, but had no significant effect on body weight, neuromotor development, or emission of ultrasonic vocalizations. In Experiment 2, pups were given a single dose of methylphenidate (5 or 20 mg/kg), saline, or no injection on one of postnatal Days 5, 7, 9, or 11. This acute methylphenidate treatment increased locomotor activity, but had no significant effects on ultrasonic vocalizations or neuromotor coordination. These results indicate that short-term, chronic methylphenidate treatment elevates locomotor responses, but has no immediate effects on anxietylike responses or on the development of neuromotor behavior of CD-1 mice in the first 11 days of life.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations18
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental PsychobiologySame topicNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFrench-language works237,207