ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2026
A perspective on the use of the CatWalk device to assess dynamic spasticity in rodent models.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Spasticity is a hallmark of upper motor neuron syndrome and arises from complex neurophysiological and biomechanical alterations, including disinhibition of the stretch reflex and secondary changes in muscle properties. While rodent models are widely used to study spasticity, objective assessment of dynamic spasticity during locomotion remains challenging. The CatWalk (CW) system is a well-established tool for automated gait analysis; however, its specific utility in quantifying spasticity-related gait abnormalities has not been systematically evaluated. Methods: A focused literature review was conducted to identify studies employing the CatWalk system in rodent models with features of spasticity. These parameters were then evaluated conceptually as candidate surrogate markers of dynamic spasticity and current evidence supporting their use. Results: Only a limited number of studies have explicitly used the CW system to assess spasticity-related gait alterations. A wide range of parameters was reported, including print-related, spatiotemporal and coordination-related parameters. While many parameters are sensitive to functional impairment, some might lack specificity for spasticity. In contrast, dynamic gait parameters such as stand phase duration, relative paw placement emerge as candidate surrogate markers but currently lack validation against established measures of spasticity. Discussion: The CW system offers substantial potential for assessing dynamic aspects of spastic gait in rodent models; however, careful selection and interpretation of parameters are critical. We propose potential candidates for future validation rather than established markers of spasticity. Future studies should focus on standardizing outcome measures and validating parameter sets that accurately reflect the underlying pathophysiology of spasticity, thereby improving translational relevance.
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.