Assessment of an Electronic Mechanical Sensory Threshold Testing Device (RatMet) in Wistar rats (<i>Rattus norvegicus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
von Frey (vF) monofilaments are used to quantify mechanical hypersensitivity and nociception in rodents; however, this method of testing has been criticized due to inconsistencies in testing methods, filament properties, and nonlinearity. This study compared withdrawal thresholds measured by using vF monofilaments with those of a novel mechanical threshold testing device currently in development (RatMet) in a carrageenan inflammatory model in 9- to 11-wk-old male Wistar rats. Rats were randomly assigned to assessment of mechanical hypersensitivity after intraplantar carrageenan injection by using either vF monofilaments ( n = 10) or the RatMet device equipped with 3 sizes of probe tips (0.9 mm [RM0.9], n = 15; 0.5 mm [RM0.5], n = 11; and 0.09 mm [RM0.09], n = 11). All RatMet probe sizes and vF monofilaments identified a reduction in withdrawal threshold after treatment. Systematic differences in threshold were identified between vF and both RM0.9 and RM0.5 groups; RM0.09 did not differ from vF. Withdrawal thresholds showed linear relationships with probe diameter, square root of probe diameter, and area of the RatMet probes. In contrast, exponential relationships were observed with the vF monofilaments. Furthermore, none of the RatMet probe results differed in accuracy when comparing a single test with the averages of 3 or 5 tests per time point. Overall, the RatMet device measurements have construct validity even when the number of testing replicates is low. These data indicate that the RatMet device produces data comparable with those from vF monofilaments, with the potential for a shortened testing period without a decrease in accuracy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".