Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Hippocampus size on brain scans

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Neurogenesis in the hippocampus occurs throughout life in a wide range of species and could be associated with hippocampus-dependent learning and memory. Stress is well established to seriously perturb physiological/psychological homeostasis and affect hippocampal function. In the present study, to investigate the effect of chronic restraint stress in early life on hippocampal neurogenesis and hippocampus-dependent memory, 3-week-old mice were subjected to restraint stress 6 days a week for 4 weeks. The chronic restraint stress significantly decreased the hippocampal volume by 6.3% and impaired hippocampal neurogenesis as indicated by the reduced number of Ki67-, 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine- and doublecortin-positive cells in the dentate gyrus. The chronic restraint stress severely impaired hippocampus-dependent contextual fear memory without affecting hippocampus-independent fear memory. The expression level of brain-specific transcription factor neuronal PAS domain protein 4 (Npas4) mRNA in the hippocampus was down-regulated by the restraint stress or by acute corticosterone treatment. Npas4 immunoreactivity was detected in progenitors, immature and mature neurons of the dentate gyrus in control and stressed mice. Our findings suggest that the chronic restraint stress decreases hippocampal neurogenesis, leading to an impairment of hippocampus-dependent fear memory in mice. Corticosterone-induced down-regulation of Npas4 expression may play a role in stress-induced impairment of hippocampal function.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Yun, J., Koike, H., Ibi, D., Toth, E., Mizoguchi, H., Nitta, A., et al. (2010). Chronic restraint stress impairs neurogenesis and hippocampus-dependent fear memory in mice: possible involvement of a brain-specific transcription factor Npas4. Journal of neurochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-4159.2010.06893.x

Vancouver

Yun J, Koike H, Ibi D, Toth E, Mizoguchi H, Nitta A, et al. Chronic restraint stress impairs neurogenesis and hippocampus-dependent fear memory in mice: possible involvement of a brain-specific transcription factor Npas4. Journal of neurochemistry. 2010. doi:10.1111/j.1471-4159.2010.06893.x. PMID: 20626564.

BibTeX

@article{yun2010-20626564,
  author  = {Yun, J. and Koike, H. and Ibi, D. and Toth, E. and Mizoguchi, H. and Nitta, A. and Yoneyama, M. and Ogita, K. and others},
  title   = {{Chronic restraint stress impairs neurogenesis and hippocampus-dependent fear memory in mice: possible involvement of a brain-specific transcription factor Npas4}},
  journal = {Journal of neurochemistry},
  year    = {2010},
  doi     = {10.1111/j.1471-4159.2010.06893.x},
  pmid    = {20626564},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-4159.2010.06893.x}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 40/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 23 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 40 of 100. Total 40 of 100.23 of the 58 points we could judge = 40 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurochemistry)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 0 / 3 Laboratory or animal study (title names “mice”) — scores zero
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 20626564)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 23 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100.
Total 40 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Related studies in Hippocampus size on brain scans

Also tagged “disorder”

492 studies in the library carry the topic tag “disorder”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 492 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Hippocampus size on brain scans

See all studies in Hippocampus size on brain scans →