Metabolic Cage Analysis of Surgically Catheterized C57Bl/6J Mice ( <i>Mus musculus</i> ) Treated with Carprofen and Sustained-release Buprenorphine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
). However, given the potential gastrointestinal side effects that these analgesics have in various species, the impact of these analgesics on mice used in metabolic studies could be concerning. To investigate the impact of carprofen and sustained-release buprenorphine on food consumption, activity level, and whole-body metabolism, we administered carprofen alone or in combination with sustained-release buprenorphine to mice that underwent jugular vein and carotid artery catheterization, or a sham surgery. The mice were individually housed in instrumented metabolic cages to continuously quantify food consumption, activity levels, and energy expenditure by indirect calorimetry. We hypothesized that catheterized mice receiving both carprofen and sustained-release buprenorphine would have decreased food consumption and increased activity level compared to mice that received sham surgery and carprofen, and catheterized mice treated with carprofen only would have similar food consumption and activity level as sham mice that received carprofen. Our results demonstrate that during the initial 12h after surgery, catheterized mice that received both carprofen and sustained-release buprenorphine were more active than sham mice that received carprofen, and were more active and consumed more food than catheterized mice that received carprofen only. Our study demonstrated how analgesia regimen can affect metabolic parameters. Therefore, researchers should carefully consider the effects that analgesic drugs can have on mice when designing metabolic or behavioral experiments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".