Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
IntroductionHemispheric asymmetries are a core organizational principle of the vertebrate brain, but they are still not fully integrated into the study of preclinical models of neurological disease. Although many rodent models naturally include lateralization through unilateral interventions, hemispheric differences are not consistently examined or systematically reported.MethodsA systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines, combining evidence from 48 studies on hemispheric asymmetries in rodent models of neurological conditions, including mild traumatic brain injury, epilepsy, stroke, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's disease.ResultsAcross these models, disease processes cause strong lateralized effects on behavior, neurochemistry, and regional metabolism. In epilepsy models specifically, hemispheric asymmetries depend on the model: early seizure spread and network excitability can be lateralized, while other paradigms show more symmetric responses, emphasizing the role of baseline circuit asymmetries and genetic background. Similar lateralized effects are seen in stroke and Parkinson's models, reflecting clinical phenomena such as lesion-side-dependent outcomes and unilateral symptom onset.DiscussionModels focusing on intrinsic hemispheric asymmetry or interhemispheric/bilateral response highlight existing differential sensitivity to experimental manipulations that may predispose the system to asymmetric outcomes. Nonetheless, variability and dynamic shifts in hemispheric organization are rarely taken into account. Incorporating hemispheric analysis systematically into experimental design and data interpretation could enhance the sensitivity, clarity, and clinical relevance of rodent models of neurological disease.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.