Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37682863›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

A systematic review and meta-analysis of thigmotactic behaviour in the open field test in rodent models associated with persistent pain.

Xue Ying Zhang, Marta Diaz-delCastillo, Lingsi Kong, Natasha Daniels, William MacIntosh-Smith, Aya Abdallah, Dominik Domanski, Denis Sofrenovic, Tsz Pui Skel Yeung, Diego Valiente and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Focal postnatal deletion ofFrontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  7. 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

14 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Xue Ying ZhangPain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7898-0665
Marta Diaz-delCastilloDepartment of Forensic Medicine, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark.
Lingsi KongDepartment of Women and Children's Health, Faculty of Life Science and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Natasha DanielsBart's Health NHS Trust Whipps Cross Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
William MacIntosh-SmithSchool of Medicine, Medical Science and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Aya AbdallahSchool of Medicine, Medical Science and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Dominik DomanskiSchool of Medicine, Medical Science and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Denis SofrenovicFaculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Tsz Pui Skel YeungFaculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Diego ValienteInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0924-8454
Jan VollertPain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.
Emily SenaCentre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Andrew S RicePain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.
Nadia SolimanPain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4443-5439
Imperial College London · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GBKing's College London · GBAarhus University · DKBarts Health NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N014103/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Thigmotaxis is an innate predator avoidance behaviour of rodents. To gain insight into how injury and disease models, and analgesic drug treatments affect thigmotaxis, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that assessed thigmotaxis in the open field test. Systematic searches were conducted of 3 databases in October 2020, March and August 2022. Study design characteristics and experimental data were extracted and analysed using a random-effects meta-analysis. We also assessed the correlation between thigmotaxis and stimulus-evoked limb withdrawal. This review included the meta-analysis of 165 studies We report thigmotaxis was increased in injury and disease models associated with persistent pain and this increase was attenuated by analgesic drug treatments in both rat and mouse experiments. Its usefulness, however, may be limited in certain injury and disease models because our analysis suggested that thigmotaxis may be associated with the locomotor function. We also conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression, but our findings on sources of heterogeneity are inconclusive because analyses were limited by insufficient available data. It was difficult to assess internal validity because reporting of methodological quality measures was poor, therefore, the studies have an unclear risk of bias. The correlation between time in the centre (type of a thigmotactic metric) and types of stimulus-evoked limb withdrawal was inconsistent. Therefore, stimulus-evoked and ethologically relevant behavioural paradigms should be viewed as two separate entities as they are conceptually and methodologically different from each other.

Indexed as

Open Field TestRodentiaAnimalsAntisocial Personality DisorderDatabases, FactualMicePainRats

Identifiers

PMID37682863
PMCPMC10490990
OpenAlexW4386561053

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.