Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28384364›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2017

Rat tickling: A systematic review of applications, outcomes, and moderators.

Megan R LaFollette, Marguerite E O'Haire, Sylvie Cloutier, Whitney B Blankenberger, Brianna N Gaskill

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Tickle fetishism: pleasure beyond playfulness.Frontiers in psychology · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Benchmarking Enrichment Efforts in the US & Canada Across Species and Enrichment Categories.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. The human tickle response and mechanisms of self-tickle suppression.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  15. Who's laughing? Play, tickling and ultrasonic vocalizations in rats.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Ultrasonic Vocalization Analysis as a Novel Metric to Assess Cage Enrichment in Rats.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Considering the "Dog" in Dog-Human Interaction.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021
    Article
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

5 authors.

Megan R LaFolletteDepartment of Animal Sciences, Center for Animal Welfare Science, College of Agriculture, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0643-2210
Marguerite E O'HaireDepartment of Comparative Pathobiology, Center for the Human-Animal Bond, College of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States of America.
Sylvie CloutierCanadian Council on Animal Care, Assessment and Accreditation Section, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Whitney B BlankenbergerDepartment of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Brianna N GaskillDepartment of Animal Sciences, Center for Animal Welfare Science, College of Agriculture, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRats initially fear humans which can increase stress and impact study results. Additionally, studying positive affective states in rats has proved challenging. Rat tickling is a promising habituation technique that can also be used to model and measure positive affect. However, current studies use a variety of methods to achieve differential results. Our objective was to systematically identify, summarize, and evaluate the research on tickling in rats to provide direction for future investigation. Our specific aims were to summarize current methods used in tickling experiments, outcomes from tickling, and moderating factors.

methodsWe systematically evaluated all articles about tickling identified from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsychInfo. Our inclusion criteria were publication in a peer-reviewed journal and collection of original, empirical data on rats using the handling method of tickling. One researcher extracted information from each article. Bias was assessed by 2 investigators using the SYRCLE bias assessment tool.

resultsWe identified 32 articles (56 experiments) published in peer-reviewed journals about rat tickling for inclusion. A wide variety of strains, sexes, and ages of rats were included. The most common method used for tickling was cycling through 15 seconds of tickling and 15 seconds of rest for 2 minutes for 3 to 5 days. Experiments with a control for tickling (N = 22) showed that tickling increases positive vocalization, approach behavior, decreases anxiety measures, improves handling, and in some cases decreases stress hormones. Tickling juvenile, individually housed rats with a trait predisposition to respond more positively to tickling, results in the most positive outcomes. Methods to reduce bias were insufficiently reported.

conclusionsWe conclude that tickling is a promising method for improving rat welfare and investigating positive affect. However, the establishment of tickling best practices is essential as the outcomes from tickling can be moderated by several factors.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalTouchAnimal CommunicationAnimalsAnxietyFearFemaleHumansMaleRats

Identifiers

PMID28384364
PMCPMC5383284

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.