ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2024
A comparison of machine learning methods for quantifying self-grooming behavior in mice.
Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Machine Learning Framework Integrating DeepLabCut and SimBA for Quantifying Aggressive Behavior in Swimming CrabAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Article
- Rodent Social Behavior Recognition Using a Global Context-Aware Vision Transformer Network.AI (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comprehensive ethological analysis of fear expression in rats using DeepLabCut and SimBA machine learning model.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: As machine learning technology continues to advance and the need for standardized behavioral quantification grows, commercial and open-source automated behavioral analysis tools are gaining prominence in behavioral neuroscience. We present a comparative analysis of three behavioral analysis pipelines-DeepLabCut (DLC) and Simple Behavioral Analysis (SimBA), HomeCageScan (HCS), and manual scoring-in measuring repetitive self-grooming among mice. Methods: Grooming behavior of mice was recorded at baseline and after water spray or restraint treatments. Videos were processed and analyzed in parallel using 3 methods (DLC/SimBA, HCS, and manual scoring), quantifying both total number of grooming bouts and total grooming duration. Results: Both treatment conditions (water spray and restraint) resulted in significant elevation in both total grooming duration and number of grooming bouts. HCS measures of grooming duration were significantly elevated relative to those derived from manual scoring: specifically, HCS tended to overestimate duration at low levels of grooming. DLC/SimBA duration measurements were not significantly different than those derived from manual scoring. However, both SimBA and HCS measures of the number of grooming bouts were significantly different than those derived from manual scoring; the magnitude and direction of the difference depended on treatment condition. Conclusion: DLC/SimBA provides a high-throughput pipeline for quantifying grooming duration that correlates well with manual scoring. However, grooming bout data derived from both DLC/SimBA and HCS did not reliably estimate measures obtained via manual scoring.
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.