Assessment of Pain Behavior in a Rat Model of Intervertebral Disc Injury Using the Catwalk Gait Analysis System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Pain behavior and immunohistological analysis in intervertebral disc (IVD) injury model. OBJECTIVE: To investigate pain behavior in a rat model of IVD injury using the CatWalk system. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There are few reports examining low back pain behavior in animal models. The CatWalk is a computer-assisted gait analysis system that provides an automated way to assess gait function and pain-related alterations of this behavior. METHODS: In the IVD injury group, L5-L6 IVDs were injured with a 24-gauge needle. Simultaneously, the neurotracer Fluoro-Gold (FG; Fluorochrome, Denver, CO) was injected into the L5-L6 IVDs. In the sham group, FG was injected into the L5-L6 IVDs only. Animals in the control group received no operation. One, 2, 3, and 4 weeks after surgery, the gait of rats in the 3 groups was investigated using the CatWalk system. One, 2, and 4 weeks after surgery, in IVD injury and sham groups, dorsal root ganglions from the L1 to L6 levels were resected. Dorsal root ganglions were immunostained for calcitonin gene-related peptide. RESULTS: In the IVD injury group, the mean stands of hind paws and the mean duty cycle of front paws at some time points were significantly higher than those in the sham group. Furthermore, the mean stride length of the front and hind paws and the mean swing speed of the front and hind paws at some time points were significantly shorter than those in the sham group. The proportion of calcitonin gene-related peptide-immunoreactive, FG-labeled neurons among all FG-labeled dorsal root ganglion neurons in the IVD injury group was significantly higher than the corresponding proportion in the sham group. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that IVD injury produced significant changes in rat gait, including longer stance phases and shorter strides. In the future, we may be able to apply the CatWalk system to the evaluation of behavior associated with pain in models of low back pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".