Care of Rats with Complete High-Thoracic Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complications of spinal cord injury (SCI) increase in number and severity with the level of injury. A recent survey of SCI researchers reveals that animal models of high SCI are essential. Despite this consensus, most laboratories continue to work with mid- or low-thoracic SCI. The available data on cervical SCI in animals characterize incomplete injuries; for example, nearly all studies published in 2009 examine discrete, tract-specific lesions that are not clinically-relevant. A primary barrier to developing animal models of severe, higher SCI is the challenge of animal care, a critical determinant of experimental outcome. Currently, many of these practices vary substantially between laboratories, and are passed down anecdotally within institutions. The care of animals with SCI is complex, and becomes much more challenging as the lesion level ascends. In our experience, the care of animals with high-thoracic (T3) SCI is much more demanding than the care of animals with low-thoracic SCI, even though both injuries result in paraplegia. We have developed an animal care regimen for rats with complete high-thoracic SCI. Our practices have been refined over the past 7 years, in collaboration with animal care centre staff and veterinarians. During this time, we have cared for more than 300 rats with T3 complete transection SCI, with experimental end-points of up to 3 months. Here we provide details of our animal care procedures, including acclimatization, housing, diet, antibiotic prophylaxis, surgical procedures, post-operative monitoring, and prevention of complications. In our laboratory, this comprehensive approach consistently produces good outcomes following T3 complete transection SCI: using body weight as an objective indicator of animal health, we have found that our rats typically return to pre-operative weights within 10 days of T3 complete SCI. It is our hope that the information provided here will improve care of experimental animals, and facilitate adoption of models that directly address the complications associated with higher level injuries.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.012 |
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".