Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:9787270rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0038435lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9787270lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0599779lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9787270lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1280500lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9787270lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1707455lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:issue3lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:dateCreated1998-11-20lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:abstractTextA handling-only control and two footshocked stressed groups for which the numbers of footshocks, 10 or 100, were determined by different proposed clinically relevant models were compared after a 15-day delay on the alerting-immobility response to a sudden reduction in noise. Only the 10-shocks group showed a significantly increased level of alert-immobility. The implications of this non-monotonicity of effects of increasing stress for modelling and scientific practice are considered.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:monthJullld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:issn1025-3890lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:authorpubmed-author:OvermierJ BJBlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MurisonRRlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:volume2lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:pagination227-30lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:dateRevised2009-3-19lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9787270-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:year1998lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:articleTitleComparison of different animal models of stress reveals a non-monotonic effect.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:affiliationDept. of Biological & Medical Psychology, University of Bergen Arstadveien 21 N-5009 Bergen, Norway. murison@psych.uib.nolld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9787270pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed