↓ Skip to main content

A Comparison of the Different Animal Models of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders and Their Use in Studying Complex Behaviors

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
176 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
230 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
A Comparison of the Different Animal Models of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders and Their Use in Studying Complex Behaviors
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fped.2014.00093
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna R. Patten, Christine J. Fontaine, Brian R. Christie

Abstract

Prenatal ethanol exposure (PNEE) has been linked to widespread impairments in brain structure and function. There are a number of animal models that are used to study the structural and functional deficits caused by PNEE, including, but not limited to invertebrates, fish, rodents, and non-human primates. Animal models enable a researcher to control important variables such as the route of ethanol administration, as well as the timing, frequency and amount of ethanol exposure. Each animal model and system of exposure has its place, depending on the research question being undertaken. In this review, we will examine the different routes of ethanol administration and the various animal models of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) that are commonly used in research, emphasizing their strengths and limitations. We will also present an up-to-date summary on the effects of prenatal/neonatal ethanol exposure on behavior across the lifespan, focusing on learning and memory, olfaction, social, executive, and motor functions. Special emphasis will be placed where the various animal models best represent deficits observed in the human condition and offer a viable test bed to examine potential therapeutics for human beings with FASD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Unknown 224 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 50 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 17%
Researcher 21 9%
Student > Master 20 9%
Student > Postgraduate 12 5%
Other 37 16%
Unknown 50 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 17%
Neuroscience 37 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 33 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 12%
Psychology 9 4%
Other 27 12%
Unknown 56 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 June 2021.
All research outputs
#14,341,537
of 24,482,039 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,893
of 7,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,846
of 242,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#13
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,482,039 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
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 242,719 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.