ArticleComparative medicine2024
Comparison of Thermal and Mechanical Pain Testing Modalities in Sprague Dawley and Fischer 344 Rats (
Article in Comparative medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Translational validity of quantitative sensory testing in chronic pain neuro-sensitization: guide of use and interpretation in osteoarthritis animal models.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
While rodents are used extensively for studying pain, there is a lack of reported direct comparisons of thermal and mechanical pain testing methods in rats of different genetic backgrounds. Understanding the range of interindividual variability of withdrawal thresholds and thermal latencies based on these testing methods and/or genetic background is important for appropriate experimental design. Testing was performed in two common rat genetic backgrounds: outbred Sprague-Dawley (SD) and inbred Fischer 344 (F344). Male and female, 10- to 14-wk-old F344 and SD rats were used to assess withdrawal thresholds in 3 different modalities: the Randall-Selitto test (RST), Hargreaves test (HT), and tail flick test (TFT). The RST was performed by using an operator-controlled handheld instrument to generate a noxious pressure stimulus to the left hind paw. The HT and the TFT used an electronically controlled light source to deliver a noxious thermal stimulus to the left hind paw or tail tip, respectively. Rats of each sex and genetic background underwent one type of test on day 0 and day 7. Withdrawal thresholds and thermal latencies were compared among tests. No significant differences were observed. Our findings can serve as a guide for researchers considering these nociceptive tests for their experiments.
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.