Table 2.
Comparisons of models to assess early life stress (ELS)-induced visceral hypersensitivity in adult animals.
| Species, Strain, Sex | Protocol | Distension stimulus | Hedges' d ± se: Sham vs. Stress | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MATERNAL SEPARATION (MS) | ||||
| Mouse, C57BL/AJ, Male | 180 min separation, PN 2-14 | 0.1 ml | 1.1 ± 0.5 | Miquel et al., 2016 |
| Mouse, C57BL/10JNju, Both | 180 min separation x 2/day, PN 2-15 | 40 mmHg | 1.9 ± 0.6 | Tang et al., 2017 |
| Rat, Long Evans, Male | 180 min separation, PN 2-14 | 60 mmHg | 0.5 ± 0.3 | Coutinho et al., 2002 |
| 1.0 ± 0.4 | Prusator and Greenwood-Van Meerveld, 2016b | |||
| 180 min separation, PN 2-14, sensitivity testing after 1 h WAS | 60 mmHg | 0.7 ± 0.4 | Coutinho et al., 2002 | |
| 2.0 ml | 1.6 ± 0.6 | van den Wijngaard et al., 2009 | ||
| Area under the curve | 2.5 ± 0.6 | van den Wijngaard et al., 2012 | ||
| 2.6 ± 0.7 | Stanisor et al., 2013 | |||
| 4.8 ± 1.0 | Botschuijver et al., 2017 | |||
| Rat, Wistar, Male | 120 min separation, PN 1-14 | 1.2 ml | 1.4 ± 0.5 | Rosztóczy et al., 2003 |
| Rat, Wistar, Female | 1.3 ± 0.5 | |||
| LIMITED NESTING | ||||
| Rat, Long Evans, Male | PN 2-9 | 60 mmHg | 2.5 ± 0.6 | Prusator and Greenwood-Van Meerveld, 2016b |
| Rat, Sprague Dawley, Male | PN 2-9 | 60 mmHg | 1.4 ± 0.5 | Prusator and Greenwood-Van Meerveld, 2015 |
| Rat, Wistar, Male | PN 2-9 | 60 mmHg | 1.1 ± 0.5 | Holschneider et al., 2016 |
| Rat, Wistar, Female | 1.1 ± 0.5 | |||
| ODOR-ATTACHMENT LEARNING | ||||
| Rat, Long Evans, Both | PN 8-12 | 60 mmHg | 1.5 ± 0.7 | Tyler et al., 2007 |
| Rat, Long Evans, Female | 1.4 ± 0.6 | Chaloner and Greenwood-Van Meerveld, 2013 | ||
| 5.2 ± 1.2 | Prusator and Greenwood-Van Meerveld, 2016a | |||
| 1.3 ± 0.5 | Prusator and Greenwood-Van Meerveld, 2016b | |||
| 5.2 ± 1.3 | Prusator and Greenwood-Van Meerveld, 2017 | |||
Due to differences between species, strain, sex, and methods used to evaluate colonic sensitivity, an effect size for the sham stress vs. stress group was calculated so that the studies could be evaluated and compared on the same scale. All colonic sensitivity assessments were performed in adult animals. For the effect size, Hedges' d with unbiased standard error (se) was estimated from the data presented in the cited paper, based on the formulas 1, 2, 14, and 17 in Nakagawa and Cuthill (2007). Briefly, the magnitude of the effect size allows for a direct comparison between studies from different laboratories. Within each citation, only a single experimental cohort has been reported. Sham and stress exposed animals may have received vehicle treatment(s) before the measurement of colonic sensitivity. PN, post-natal day.