Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 703

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessing the Validity of an Animal Model of Deficient Sensorimotor Gating in Schizophrenic Patients

Swerdlow, Neal R.·1994·Archives of General Psychiatry

Abstract

Psychiatric researchers need specific animal models to better understand the neurobiology of schizophrenia. Prepulse inhibition (PPI), the reduction in startle produced by a prepulse stimulus, is diminished in schizophrenic patients. Theoretically, deficient PPI in schizophrenic patients reflects a loss of sensorimotor gating that may lead to sensory flooding and cognitive fragmentation. In rats, PPI is disrupted by systemic administration of dopamine agonists or by manipulations of neural circuitry linking the limbic cortex, striatum, pallidum, and pontine reticular formation. This loss of PPI in rats may be a useful model for studying the neurobiology of impaired sensorimotor gating in schizophrenic patients. We assessed the face, predictive, and construct validity of this animal model. Face validity was supported: stimulus manipulations produced parallel changes in PPI in humans and rats, and the dopamine agonist apomorphine disrupted PPI in rats, mimicking PPI deficits in schizophrenics. Predictive validity was supported: the ability of antipsychotics to restore PPI in apomorphine-treated rats correlated with clinical antipsychotic potency (rs = .991) and D2-receptor affinity (rs = .893). Antipsychotics that restore PPI in apomorphine-treated rats include "typical" antipsychotics and the "atypical" antipsychotic clozapine. Construct validity was supported: PPI was disrupted in rats when dopamine was infused into the nucleus accumbens; this effect was blocked by haloperidol. The loss of PPI in dopamine-activated rats may be a valid animal model of sensorimotor gating deficits in schizophrenic patients. This model may help us understand the neurobiology of cognitive deficits in schizophrenic patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpsyc.1994.03950020063007

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 703

Metadata

Authors
Swerdlow, N. R.
Venue
Archives of General Psychiatry
Published
1994-02-01
Volume
51
Issue
2
Pages
139
ISSN
0003-990X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042676846
Cited by
703
References
5
FWCI
24.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessing the Validity of an Animal Model of Deficient Sensorimotor Gating in Schizophrenic Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archpsyc.1994.03950020063007
The paper
Swerdlow, N. R. (1994). Assessing the Validity of an Animal Model of Deficient Sensorimotor Gating in Schizophrenic Patients. Archives of General Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1994.03950020063007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.