2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.alcohol.2018.05.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of noncontingent ethanol, DHEA, and pregnanolone administration on ethanol self-administration in outbred female rats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 54 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One- and two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were used to analyze the grouped data, and Dunnett’s post hoc tests were used to make pairwise comparisons with control (saline or THC/RMBT vehicle) when significant main effects or interactions were obtained. When the number of subjects varied across doses and prohibited a repeated measures analysis (e.g., safety concerns prevented the testing of some doses and dose combinations), a 95% confidence interval for heroin alone was generated and data that fell outside of the 95% confidence interval were considered statistically significant (Erwin, Nilges, DeLarge, Weed, & Winsauer, 2019). As part of ensuring that the doses tested in each animal captured comparably effective dose ranges (i.e., no effect to a maximally effective dose), the subjects were not always tested with the same number of doses and this reduced the sample size for some dosages.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One- and two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were used to analyze the grouped data, and Dunnett’s post hoc tests were used to make pairwise comparisons with control (saline or THC/RMBT vehicle) when significant main effects or interactions were obtained. When the number of subjects varied across doses and prohibited a repeated measures analysis (e.g., safety concerns prevented the testing of some doses and dose combinations), a 95% confidence interval for heroin alone was generated and data that fell outside of the 95% confidence interval were considered statistically significant (Erwin, Nilges, DeLarge, Weed, & Winsauer, 2019). As part of ensuring that the doses tested in each animal captured comparably effective dose ranges (i.e., no effect to a maximally effective dose), the subjects were not always tested with the same number of doses and this reduced the sample size for some dosages.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%