Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40033013›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Risk factors for barbering in laboratory mice.

Anna S Ratuski, Jacob H Theil, Jamie Ahloy-Dallaire, Brianna N Gaskill, Kathleen R Pritchett-Corning, Stephen A Felt, Joseph P Garner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anna S RatuskiDepartment of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. aratuski@stanford.edu.
Jacob H TheilCampus Veterinary Services, University of California, Davis, CA, USA.
Jamie Ahloy-DallaireDepartment of Animal Science, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Brianna N GaskillNovartis Institute for Biomedical Research, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Kathleen R Pritchett-CorningOffice of Animal Resources, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Stephen A FeltDepartment of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Joseph P GarnerDepartment of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. jgarner@stanford.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Barbering is a common abnormal behavior in laboratory mice, where mice pluck their own fur and/or the fur or whiskers of their cage mates. Barbering mice are a concern for welfare and research quality, as well as serving as a spontaneous model of trichotillomania (a hair-pulling disorder in humans). Causes and prevention of barbering are poorly understood, although there is evidence that both biological and environmental factors play a role in its prevalence. Since initial work in this area was done 20 years ago, mouse husbandry has changed dramatically. We provide an updated analysis of risk factors for barbering in laboratory mice based on point prevalence of hair loss in 2544 cages over one year (7007 mice). We analyzed the effects of biological, environmental, and husbandry factors that are known to be stressors for mice. We found that certain risk factors for barbering, such as sex and breeding status, have persisted despite changes in housing. We additionally identified differences in prevalence based on genetic background, housing system, time of year, and a "hotspot" effect showing spatial clustering of barbering. Our findings can be used to increase understanding of this behavior and to inform changes in husbandry to reduce its prevalence.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnimals, LaboratoryFemaleHousing, AnimalMaleMiceRisk Factors3RsAbnormal behaviorAlopeciaAnimal welfareEpidemiologyStereotypies

Identifiers

PMID40033013
PMCPMC11876326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.