MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128316141 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0245355

Social isolation induces hyperactivity and exploration in aged female mice

2021· article· en· W3128316141 on OpenAlexaff
D. Gregory Sullens, Kayla Gilley, Kendall Jensen, Elisabeth G. Vichaya, Sara L. Dolan, Melanie J. Sekeres

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersBaylor University
KeywordsSocial isolationContext (archaeology)PsychologyIsolation (microbiology)DistressPsychological interventionPopulationMedicineDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryBiologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prolonged social isolation is associated with poor physical and mental health outcomes, findings observed in both humans, and rodent models of isolation. Humans, like mice, may engage in enhanced exploratory and social behaviour following isolation, which may protect against subsequent cognitive decline and psychological distress. Understanding how these effects may impact behaviour in older adults is particularly relevant, as this population is likely to experience periods of late-life social isolation. We report that late-life social isolation in female mice did not lead to robust depressive-like symptomology, altered social interaction behaviour, sensitivity to context fear acquisition and memory, or alterations in inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, IL-1β, Tnf-α) or microglial activation (Itgam) within the hippocampus. Rather, isolation increased hyperactivity and exploration behaviours. These findings have translational value as the first female mouse model of late-life social isolation, and provide evidence to inform the development of interventions aimed at promoting functional recovery following isolation in late-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 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFrench-language works237,207