ArticleJournal of feline medicine and surgery2021
Assessment of the cutaneous trunci reflex in neurologically healthy cats.
Article in Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2021. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility and Validity of Postural Reaction Tests in the Neurological Examination in Healthy Rabbits.Veterinary sciences · 2023Article
- Does preappointment gabapentin affect neurological examination findings? A prospective, randomized and blinded study in healthy cats.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Assessment of the cutaneous trunci muscle reflex in healthy cats: comparison of results acquired by clinicians and cat owners.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to perform the cutaneous trunci reflex (CTR) in neurologically normal cats using two different instruments and determine how body condition score (BCS), body circumference, age, sex and instrument type may affect this reflex.
methodsSixty-five cats without evidence of neurologic disease were prospectively enrolled. Cats were randomly assigned to have the reflex tested first using a pair of hemostatic forceps or the integrated Babinski tip of an MDF Babinski Buck Reflex Hammer. After 30 mins, the reflex was retested using the other instrument. Data collected included the reflex presence, reflex caudal border, reflex intensity (weak, moderate, strong) and reflex symmetry (unilateral or bilateral). The influence of BCS, body circumference, age and sex on these variables was statistically evaluated along with effect of the instrument used.
resultsThe CTR was elicited bilaterally in 52 (80%) cats and unilaterally in 64 (98%) cats. In two cats, the CTR was only able to be elicited using the Buck Reflex Hammer, while in four cats, the CTR was only able to be elicited using hemostatic forceps. Body circumference, BCS, age and sex had no effect on the presence, caudal border, intensity or symmetry of the CTR, regardless of the instrument used. No difference in the bilateral presence of the CTR was noted based on the instrument used first ( CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The CTR could be elicited in the majority of cats with both instruments. However, hemostatic forceps elicited a reflex more caudally and bilaterally symmetrical than the Buck Reflex Hammer.
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.