Cited by 59Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorBarrier Structure and Function StudiesCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Brain–Fluid Barriers: Relevance for Theoretical Controversies Regarding Vasopressin and Oxytocin Memory Research

McEwen, Barbara B.·2004·Advances in pharmacology

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1054-3589(04)50014-5

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
McEwen, B. B.
Affiliations
Southern Connecticut State University (US)
Corresponding author
McEwen, Barbara B.
Venue
Advances in pharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
2004
Volume
50
Pages
531-592
ISSN
1054-3589 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1596239931
Cited by
59
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.41
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Advances in pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Keywords
vasopressin, oxytocin, blood-brain barrier, blood-CSF barrier, cerebrospinal fluid, peptide transport, memory, brain capillary endothelium
MeSH terms
Animals, Arginine Vasopressin, Blood-Brain Barrier, Humans, Memory, Oxytocin, Vasopressins

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