Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36232643›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2022

Motor Behavioral Deficits in the Cuprizone Model: Validity of the Rotarod Test Paradigm.

Concordia Lubrich, Paula Giesler, Markus Kipp

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Concordia LubrichInstitute of Anatomy, Rostock University Medical Center, 18057 Rostock, Germany.
Paula GieslerInstitute of Anatomy, Rostock University Medical Center, 18057 Rostock, Germany.
Markus KippInstitute of Anatomy, Rostock University Medical Center, 18057 Rostock, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5043-9052
University of Rostock · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a neuroinflammatory disorder, which is histopathologically characterized by multifocal inflammatory demyelinating lesions affecting both the central nervous system's white and grey matter. Especially during the progressive phases of the disease, immunomodulatory treatment strategies lose their effectiveness. To develop novel progressive MS treatment options, pre-clinical animal models are indispensable. Among the various different models, the cuprizone de- and remyelination model is frequently used. While most studies determine tissue damage and repair at the histological and ultrastructural level, functional readouts are less commonly applied. Among the various overt functional deficits, gait and coordination abnormalities are commonly observed in MS patients. Motor behavior is mediated by a complex neural network that originates in the cortex and terminates in the skeletal muscles. Several methods exist to determine gait abnormalities in small rodents, including the rotarod testing paradigm. In this review article, we provide an overview of the validity and characteristics of the rotarod test in cuprizone-intoxicated mice.

Indexed as

Demyelinating DiseasesMultiple SclerosisRemyelinationAnimalsCuprizoneDisease Models, AnimalMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMyelin SheathRotarod Performance TestCuprizonecuprizonedeficitdemyelinationgaitmotormultiple sclerosisprogressionremyelination

Identifiers

PMID36232643
PMCPMC9570024
OpenAlexW4297540025

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.