ArticleScientific reports2024
Unbiased analysis of spatial learning strategies in a modified Barnes maze using convolutional neural networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Renovating the Barnes maze for mouse models of dementia with STARR FIELD: A 4-day protocol for learning rate, retention, and cognitive flexibility.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2026Article
- Fasting is required for many of the benefits of calorie restriction in the 3xTg mouse model of Alzheimer's disease.Nature communications · 2025Article
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
Assessment of spatial learning abilities is central to behavioral neuroscience and a useful tool for animal model validation and drug development. However, biases introduced by the apparatus, environment, or experimentalist represent a critical challenge to the test validity. We have recently developed the Modified Barnes Maze (MBM) task, a spatial learning paradigm that overcomes inherent behavioral biases of animals in the classical Barnes maze. The specific combination of spatial strategies employed by mice is often considered representative of the level of cognitive resources used. Herein, we have developed a convolutional neural network-based classifier of exploration strategies in the MBM that can effectively provide researchers with enhanced insights into cognitive traits in mice. Following validation, we compared the learning performance of female and male C57BL/6J mice, as well as that of Ts65Dn mice, a model of Down syndrome, and 5xFAD mice, a model of Alzheimer's disease. Male mice exhibited more effective navigation abilities than female mice, reflected in higher utilization of effective spatial search strategies. Compared to wildtype controls, Ts65Dn mice exhibited delayed usage of spatial strategies despite similar success rates in completing this spatial task. 5xFAD mice showed increased usage of non-spatial strategies such as Circling that corresponded to higher latency to reach the target and lower success rate. These data exemplify the need for deeper strategy classification tools in dissecting complex cognitive traits. In sum, we provide a machine-learning-based strategy classifier that extends our understanding of mice's spatial learning capabilities while enabling a more accurate cognitive assessment.
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.