ArticleNeurorehabilitation and neural repair2019
Automated Forelimb Tasks for Rodents: Current Advantages and Limitations, and Future Promise.
Article in Neurorehabilitation and neural repair, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- N-Acetylcysteine Treatment May Compensate Motor Impairments through Dopaminergic Transmission Modulation in a Striatal 6-Hydroxydopamine Parkinson's Disease Rat Model.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- AutoRG: An automatized reach-to-grasp platform technology for assessing forelimb motor function, neural circuit activation, and cognition in rodents.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rodent tests of function have advanced our understanding of movement, largely through the human training and testing and manual assessment. Tools such as reaching and grasping of a food pellet have been widely adopted because they are effective and simple to use. However, these tools are time-consuming, subjective, and often qualitative. Automation of training, testing, and assessment has the potential to increase efficiency while ensuring tasks are objective and quantitative. We detail new methods for automating rodent forelimb tests, including the use of pellet dispensers, sensors, computer vision, and home cage systems. We argue that limitations in existing forelimb tasks are driving the innovations in automated systems. We further argue that automated tasks partially address these limitations, and we outline necessary precautions and remaining challenges when adopting these types of tasks. Finally, we suggest attributes of future automated rodent assessment tools that can enable widespread adoption and help us better understand forelimb function in health and disease.
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.