Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28456660›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroscience methods2018

Assessing mouse behaviour throughout the light/dark cycle using automated in-cage analysis tools.

Rasneer S Bains, Sara Wells, Rowland R Sillito, J Douglas Armstrong, Heather L Cater, Gareth Banks, Patrick M Nolan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroscience methods, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing 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

86 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Effects of Cage Change and Nest Transfer on Artificial Intelligence-Measured Behaviors in Male C57BL/6 Mice.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

26 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

7 authors.

Rasneer S BainsMary Lyon Centre, MRC Harwell Institute, Harwell Science Campus, Oxfordshire, UK.
Sara WellsMary Lyon Centre, MRC Harwell Institute, Harwell Science Campus, Oxfordshire, UK.
Rowland R SillitoActual Analytics Ltd., Edinburgh, UK.
J Douglas ArmstrongActual Analytics Ltd., Edinburgh, UK; School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Heather L CaterMary Lyon Centre, MRC Harwell Institute, Harwell Science Campus, Oxfordshire, UK.
Gareth BanksMammalian Genetics Unit, MRC Harwell Institute, Harwell Science Campus, Oxfordshire, UK.
Patrick M NolanMammalian Genetics Unit, MRC Harwell Institute, Harwell Science Campus, Oxfordshire, UK. Electronic address: p.nolan@har.mrc.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U142684173Medical Research Council MC_UP_1502/1National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/C012201/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An important factor in reducing variability in mouse test outcomes has been to develop assays that can be used for continuous automated home cage assessment. Our experience has shown that this has been most evidenced in long-term assessment of wheel-running activity in mice. Historically, wheel-running in mice and other rodents have been used as a robust assay to determine, with precision, the inherent period of circadian rhythms in mice. Furthermore, this assay has been instrumental in dissecting the molecular genetic basis of mammalian circadian rhythms. In teasing out the elements of this test that have determined its robustness - automated assessment of an unforced behaviour in the home cage over long time intervals - we and others have been investigating whether similar test apparatus could be used to accurately discriminate differences in distinct behavioural parameters in mice. Firstly, using these systems, we explored behaviours in a number of mouse inbred strains to determine whether we could extract biologically meaningful differences. Secondly, we tested a number of relevant mutant lines to determine how discriminative these parameters were. Our findings show that, when compared to conventional out-of-cage phenotyping, a far deeper understanding of mouse mutant phenotype can be established by monitoring behaviour in the home cage over one or more light:dark cycles.

Indexed as

Housing, AnimalPhotoperiodAnimalsAnimal WelfareBehavioral ResearchBehavior, AnimalCircadian RhythmMiceRunningCircadianHome cageMotor functionRefinementWelfareWheel running

Identifiers

PMID28456660
PMCPMC5909039

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.