Evidence mapPaperPMID 42093751Full record

ArticleNeurobiology of stress2026

Early-life adversity in rodents: Experimental design is of the essence.

Rixt van der Veen, Marian Joëls, Aniko Korosi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurobiology of stress, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rixt van der VeenSwammerdam Institute for Life Science, Center for Neuroscience, Brain Plasticity Group, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Marian JoëlsUniversity Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
Aniko KorosiSwammerdam Institute for Life Science, Center for Neuroscience, Brain Plasticity Group, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Early-life adversity (ELA) is a well-documented risk factor for the development of psychiatric illnesses. Prospective investigations in humans are complex and limited in their ability to study the underlying neurobiological mechanisms, which is why many have reverted to animal models to examine the lasting consequences of ELA. In this contribution, we focus primarily on exposure to ELA during the postnatal period and highlight crucial elements of the experimental design that decisively contribute to the observed outcome. These elements include i) aspects of timing, encompassing the developmental stage during which ELA is experienced, the duration and repetitiveness of early-life stressors, and the time point at which the outcomes are investigated; ii) the early-life environment, e.g., the quality and quantity of parental care, the breeding specifics, housing conditions and nutrition, or mitigating interventions; iii) characteristics of later-life readouts, i.e., specific behavioral domains examined, the tasks selected to probe these domains, and the state of the animal at the time of testing; and iv) sex differences. We conclude by discussing how to maximize the advantages of ELA animal models to gain a comprehensive insight into the (neuro)biological mechanisms underlying the lasting consequences of ELA.

Indexed as

BrainEarly-life stressRodentSexTiming

Identifiers

PMID42093751
PMCPMC13142006

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.