ArticleThe open neurology journal2013
Neurological assessment scores in rabbit embolic stroke models.
Article in The open neurology journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Optimal Animal Model of Ischemic Stroke Established by Digital Subtraction Angiography-Guided Autologous Thrombi in Cynomolgus Monkeys.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Preclinical animal studies in ischemic stroke: Challenges and some solutions.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2021Review
- Longitudinal effects of common carotid artery stenosis on ocular hemodynamics assessed using laser speckle flowgraphy in a rabbit model.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Dynamic EPR Oximetry of Changes in Intracerebral Oxygen Tension During Induced Thromboembolism.Cell biochemistry and biophysics · 2017Article
- Dodecafluoropentane Improves Neurological Function Following Anterior Ischemic Stroke.Molecular neurobiology · 2017Article
- Muscle pathology, limb strength, walking gait, respiratory function and neurological impairment establish disease progression in the p.N155K canine model of X-linked myotubular myopathy.Annals of translational medicine · 2015Article
- Validity of a Neurological Scoring System for Canine X-Linked Myotubular Myopathy.Human gene therapy. Clinical development · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeurological outcomes and behavioral assessments are widely used in animal models of stroke, but assessments in rabbit models are not fully validated. The wryneck model of neurological assessment scores (NAS) was compared to percent infarct volume (%IV) values (infarct volume is a proven clinical indicator of stroke severity) and arterial occlusion localization in three rabbit angiographic stroke models. HYPOTHESIS: NAS values will correlate with percent infarct volume values.
methodsAnesthetized New Zealand White rabbits (N=131, 4-5 kg) received internal carotid artery emboli by angiographic catheter introduced into the femoral artery and occlusions were characterized. Rabbits were evaluated at 24 hours post embolism using the NAS test of 0 (normal) to 10 (death). Deficit criteria included neck twist, righting reflex, extension reflex in hind paw and forepaw, and posture. Brain sections stained with triphenyltetrazolium chloride (TTC) were analyzed for %IV. Volume of the infarct was measured and calculated as a percent of the total brain volume.
resultsThe aggregate correlation for NAS values vs. %IV values was R=0.61, p<0.0001, a strong positive relationship, while correlations of the NAS components ranged from R=0.28-0.46. Occlusionsof the posterior cerebral artery vs. the middle cerebral artery alone produced significantly greater deficit scores at p<0.0001.
conclusionsThese positive results validate the NAS system in the rabbit angiographic embolic stroke model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.