Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37953247›Full record

SynthesisBMC biology2023

A systematic review of the development and application of home cage monitoring in laboratory mice and rats.

Pia Kahnau, Paul Mieske, Jenny Wilzopolski, Otto Kalliokoski, Silvia Mandillo, Sabine M Hölter, Vootele Voikar, Adriana Amfim, Sylvia Badurek, Aleksandra Bartelik and 20 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
16.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. On the importance of including both sexes in animal studies - insights from home-cage monitoring.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Effects of Cage Change and Nest Transfer on Artificial Intelligence-Measured Behaviors in Male C57BL/6 Mice.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Role of Peptides in Skeletal Muscle Wasting: A Scoping Review.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025
    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

30 authors at 19 institutions in 16 countries.

Pia KahnauGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R), Berlin, Germany.
Paul MieskeGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R), Berlin, Germany.
Jenny WilzopolskiGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R), Berlin, Germany.
Otto KalliokoskiDepartment of Experimental Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Silvia MandilloInstitute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, National Research Council CNR, Rome, Italy.
Sabine M HölterHelmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Centre for Environmental Health, Munich, Germany.
Vootele VoikarNeuroscience Center, Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Adriana AmfimFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Spiru Haret University, Bucharest, Romania.
Sylvia BadurekPreclinical Phenotyping Facility, Vienna Biocenter Core Facilities (VBCF), member of the Vienna Biocenter (VBC), Vienna, Austria.
Aleksandra BartelikInternational Clinical Research Center, St. Anne's University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Angela CarusoIstituto Superiore Di Sanità, Research Coordination and Support Service, Rome, Italy.
Maša ČaterDepartment of Animal Science, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Elodie EyUniversité de Strasbourg, CNRS, Inserm, Institut de Génétique et de Biologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire UMR 7104- UMR-S 1258, Illkirch, 67400, France.
Elisabetta GoliniInstitute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, National Research Council CNR, Rome, Italy.
Anne JaapInstitute of Animal Welfare, Animal Behavior and Laboratory Animal Science, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Dragan HrncicInstitute of Medical Physiology "Richard Burian", Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
Anna KirykLaboratory of Preclinical Testing of Higher Standard, Neurobiology Center, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Science, Warsaw, Poland.
Benjamin LangInstitute of Animal Welfare, Animal Behavior and Laboratory Animal Science, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Natasa Loncarevic-VasiljkoviciNOVA4Health, NOVA Medical School, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, NMS, FCM, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Hamid MezianeUniversité de Strasbourg, CNRS, INSERM, Institut Clinique de La Souris (ICS), CELPHEDIA, PHENOMIN, 1 Rue Laurent Fries, Illkirch, 67404, France.
Aurelija RadzevičienėLithuanian University of Health Sciences, Medical Academy, Institute of Physiology and Pharmacology, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Marion RivalanResearch Institute for Experimental Medicine (FEM) and NeuroCure Cluster of Excellence, Animal Behaviour Phenotyping Facility, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Maria Luisa ScattoniIstituto Superiore Di Sanità, Research Coordination and Support Service, Rome, Italy.
Nicolas TorquetUniversité de Strasbourg, CNRS, Inserm, IGBMC, Institut Clinique de la Souris (ICS), CELPHEDIA, PHENOMIN, UMR 7104- UMR-S 1258, Illkirch, 67400, France.
Julijana TrifkovicDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo, East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Brun UlfhakeDiv. Clinical Physiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Christa Thöne-ReinekeInstitute of Animal Welfare, Animal Behavior and Laboratory Animal Science, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Kai DiederichGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R), Berlin, Germany.
Lars LewejohannGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R), Berlin, Germany.
Katharina HohlbaumGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R), Berlin, Germany. katharina.hohlbaum@bfr.bund.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6681-9367
Federal Institute for Risk Assessment · DECentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRFreie Universität Berlin · DEIstituto Superiore di Sanità · ITNational Research Council · ITCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEHelmholtz Zentrum München · DEInstytut Biologii Doświadczalnej im. Marcelego Nenckiego · PLKarolinska Institutet · SELithuanian University of Health Sciences · LTSpiru Haret University · ROUniversidade Nova de Lisboa · PTUniversity Hospital Brno · CZUniversity of Belgrade · RSUniversity of Copenhagen · DKUniversity of East Sarajevo · BAUniversity of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Ljubljana · SIVienna Biocenter · AT

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft EXC 2002/1 "Science of Intelligence" - project number 390523135
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditionally, in biomedical animal research, laboratory rodents are individually examined in test apparatuses outside of their home cages at selected time points. However, the outcome of such tests can be influenced by various factors and valuable information may be missed when the animals are only monitored for short periods. These issues can be overcome by longitudinally monitoring mice and rats in their home cages. To shed light on the development of home cage monitoring (HCM) and the current state-of-the-art, a systematic review was carried out on 521 publications retrieved through PubMed and Web of Science.

resultsBoth the absolute (~ × 26) and relative (~ × 7) number of HCM-related publications increased from 1974 to 2020. There was a clear bias towards males and individually housed animals, but during the past decade (2011-2020), an increasing number of studies used both sexes and group housing. In most studies, animals were kept for short (up to 4 weeks) time periods in the HCM systems; intermediate time periods (4-12 weeks) increased in frequency in the years between 2011 and 2020. Before the 2000s, HCM techniques were predominantly applied for less than 12 h, while 24-h measurements have been more frequent since the 2000s. The systematic review demonstrated that manual monitoring is decreasing in relation to automatic techniques but still relevant. Until (and including) the 1990s, most techniques were applied manually but have been progressively replaced by automation since the 2000s. Independent of the year of publication, the main behavioral parameters measured were locomotor activity, feeding, and social behaviors; the main physiological parameters were heart rate and electrocardiography. External appearance-related parameters were rarely examined in the home cages. Due to technological progress and application of artificial intelligence, more refined and detailed behavioral parameters have been investigated in the home cage more recently.

conclusionsOver the period covered in this study, techniques for HCM of mice and rats have improved considerably. This development is ongoing and further progress as well as validation of HCM systems will extend the applications to allow for continuous, longitudinal, non-invasive monitoring of an increasing range of parameters in group-housed small rodents in their home cages.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBehavior, AnimalAnimalsAnimals, DomesticFemaleHeart RateMaleMiceRatsSocial BehaviorAnimal welfareBehaviorHistoryHome cage monitoringMicePhysiologyRatsRefinementRodentsSex bias

Identifiers

PMID37953247
PMCPMC10642068
OpenAlexW4388617498

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.