ArticleBiomedical optics express2019
Remote vitals monitoring in rodents using video recordings.
Article in Biomedical optics express, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Video based heart rate detection in unrestrained laboratory rats: a feasibility analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Respiratory rate as a X-ray-based biomarker for the longitudinal assessment of lung function and pathology.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- 3R-Refinement principles: elevating rodent well-being and research quality.Laboratory animal research · 2024Review
- Camera-Based Respiration Monitoring of Unconstrained Rodents.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Additional Assessment of Fecal Corticosterone Metabolites Improves Visual Rating in the Evaluation of Stress Responses of Laboratory Rats.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Contactless Video-Based Heart Rate Monitoring of a Resting and an Anesthetized Pig.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Perspective review of optical imaging in welfare assessment in animal-based research.Journal of biomedical optics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laboratory animal research was always crucial for scientific breakthroughs in the fields of medicine and biology. Animal trials offer insights into various disease mechanisms, genetics, drug therapy and the effect of different external factors onto living organisms. However, conducting animal trials is highly controversial. To ensure high ethical standards, a number of directives have been adopted in the European Union, which seek to replace, reduce and refine animal trials. Hence, severity assessment plays an important role in today's laboratory animal research. Currently, severity of trials is assessed by highly rater dependent scoring systems. In this paper, we propose a method for unobtrusive, automated and contactless measurement of respiratory rate (RR) and heart rate (HR). We were able to extract RR and HR with an high agreement between our method and a contact-based reference method. The Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) averaged 0.32 ± 0.11 breaths/min for RR and 1.28 ± 0.62 beats/min for HR in rats, respectively. In mice, the RMSE averaged 1.42 ± 0.97 breaths/min for RR and 1.36 ± 0.87 beats/min, respectively. In the future, these parameters can be used for new, objective scoring systems, which are not susceptible to inter-rater variability.
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.