Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22558191›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

The assessment of post-vasectomy pain in mice using behaviour and the Mouse Grimace Scale.

Matthew C Leach, Kristel Klaus, Amy L Miller, Maud Scotto di Perrotolo, Susana G Sotocinal, Paul A Flecknell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 109 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
109citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
18.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

109 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 210 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. An equine pain face.Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia · 2015
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review of Rat (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

49 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthew C LeachInstitute of Neuroscience and Comparative Biology Centre, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. Matthew.Leach@Newcastle.ac.uk
Kristel Klaus
Amy L Miller
Maud Scotto di Perrotolo
Susana G Sotocinal
Paul A Flecknell
Newcastle University · GBMcGill University · CA

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilNational Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research G1100563/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent behaviour-based pain assessments for laboratory rodents have significant limitations. Assessment of facial expression changes, as a novel means of pain scoring, may overcome some of these limitations. The Mouse Grimace Scale appears to offer a means of assessing post-operative pain in mice that is as effective as manual behavioural-based scoring, without the limitations of such schemes. Effective assessment of post-operative pain is not only critical for animal welfare, but also the validity of science using animal models. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsThis study compared changes in behaviour assessed using both an automated system ("HomeCageScan") and using manual analysis with changes in facial expressions assessed using the Mouse Grimace Scale (MGS). Mice (n = 6/group) were assessed before and after surgery (scrotal approach vasectomy) and either received saline, meloxicam or bupivacaine. Both the MGS and manual scoring of pain behaviours identified clear differences between the pre and post surgery periods and between those animals receiving analgesia (20 mg/kg meloxicam or 5 mg/kg bupivacaine) or saline post-operatively. Both of these assessments were highly correlated with those showing high MGS scores also exhibiting high frequencies of pain behaviours. Automated behavioural analysis in contrast was only able to detect differences between the pre and post surgery periods.

conclusionsIn conclusion, both the Mouse Grimace Scale and manual scoring of pain behaviours are assessing the presence of post-surgical pain, whereas automated behavioural analysis could be detecting surgical stress and/or post-surgical pain. This study suggests that the Mouse Grimace Scale could prove to be a quick and easy means of assessing post-surgical pain, and the efficacy of analgesic treatment in mice that overcomes some of the limitations of behaviour-based assessment schemes.

Indexed as

AnalgesiaFacial ExpressionAnalgesicsAnimalsBehavior, AnimalBupivacaineHumansMaleMeloxicamMiceModels, AnimalPain MeasurementPostoperative PainPostoperative PeriodResearch DesignSodium ChlorideAnalgesicsBupivacaineMeloxicamSodium ChlorideThiazinesThiazoles

Identifiers

PMID22558191
PMCPMC3338444
OpenAlexW1990079562

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.