ArticleBMC research notes2026
Automated image-based classification of rat fecal consistency using an object-detection tool.
Article in BMC research notes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveManual classification of rat fecal consistency is widely used in gastrointestinal and pharmacological research, but it is highly inefficient and exposes researchers to allergens due to frequent defecation and continuous handling. Automated image-based analysis addresses a gap in high-throughput experimental workflows by reducing human error and improving scalability. Therefore, this study aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model using the YOLOv5-L6 object-detection framework to automate the classification of fecal consistency into four categories: normal, soft, muddy, and watery. Moreover, the efficiency and reproducibility of the proposed framework are compared with manual methods.
resultsA dataset of 95 images containing 1,667 labeled fecal samples was prepared with augmentation techniques to enhance robustness. The trained model achieved a mean average precision (mAP) of 86.2%, with class-specific average precision ranging from 75.5% to 95.4%. Compared with manual classification, which required an average of 45 ± 11.3 min, the AI-based approach completed initial classification in 53 s. Moreover, by including manual correction of misclassifications, the total time was approximately 8 min, representing an 82% reduction in processing time. These findings demonstrate that AI-based object detection can substantially improve workflow efficiency in preclinical research.
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.