↓ Skip to main content

Sex-specific attentional deficits in adult vitamin D deficient BALB/c mice

Overview of attention for article published in Physiology & Behavior, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sex-specific attentional deficits in adult vitamin D deficient BALB/c mice
Published in
Physiology & Behavior, February 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.01.033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalie J. Groves, Thomas H.J. Burne

Abstract

Epidemiological studies have shown an association between vitamin D deficiency and cognitive impairment. However, there is a paucity of preclinical data showing that vitamin D deficiency is a causal factor for impaired cognitive processing. The aim of this study was to assess two cognitive tasks, the 5 choice-serial reaction task and the 5 choice-continuous performance task in adult vitamin D (AVD) deficient BALB/c mice. Ten-week old male and female BALB/c mice were fed a control or vitamin D deficient diet for 10weeks prior to, and during behavioural testing. We found sex-dependent impairments in attentional processing and showed that male AVD-deficient mice were less accurate, took longer to respond when making a correct choice and were more likely to make an omission, without a change in the motivation to collect reward. By contrast, female AVD-deficient mice had a reduced latency to collect reward, but no changes on any other measures compared to controls. Therefore, we have shown that in otherwise healthy adult mice, vitamin D deficiency led to mild cognitive impairment in male but not female mice and therefore this model will be useful for future investigations into unravelling the mechanism by which vitamin D affects the adult brain and cognitive function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Student > Master 7 11%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 19 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Psychology 6 10%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 21 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2016.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Physiology & Behavior
#4,189
of 5,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#300,084
of 405,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physiology & Behavior
#72
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,536 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 405,717 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.