IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0230141.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design of composite measure schemes for comparative severity assessment in animal-based neuroscience research: A case study focussed on rat epilepsy models

Author

Listed:
  • Roelof Maarten van Dijk
  • Ines Koska
  • Andre Bleich
  • Rene Tolba
  • Isabel Seiffert
  • Christina Möller
  • Valentina Di Liberto
  • Steven Roger Talbot
  • Heidrun Potschka

Abstract

Comparative severity assessment of animal models and experimental interventions is of utmost relevance for harm-benefit analysis during ethical evaluation, an animal welfare-based model prioritization as well as the validation of refinement measures. Unfortunately, there is a lack of evidence-based approaches to grade an animal’s burden in a sensitive, robust, precise, and objective manner. Particular challenges need to be considered in the context of animal-based neuroscientific research because models of neurological disorders can be characterized by relevant changes in the affective state of an animal. Here, we report about an approach for parameter selection and development of a composite measure scheme designed for precise analysis of the distress of animals in a specific model category. Data sets from the analysis of several behavioral and biochemical parameters in three different epilepsy models were subjected to a principal component analysis to select the most informative parameters. The top-ranking parameters included burrowing, open field locomotion, social interaction, and saccharin preference. These were combined to create a composite measure scheme (CMS). CMS data were subjected to cluster analysis enabling the allocation of severity levels to individual animals. The results provided information for a direct comparison between models indicating a comparable severity of the electrical and chemical post-status epilepticus models, and a lower severity of the kindling model. The new CMS can be directly applied for comparison of other rat models with seizure activity or for assessment of novel refinement approaches in the respective research field. The respective online tool for direct application of the CMS or for creating a new CMS based on other parameters from different models is available at https://github.com/mytalbot/cms. However, the robustness and generalizability needs to be further assessed in future studies. More importantly, our concept of parameter selection can serve as a practice example providing the basis for comparable approaches applicable to the development and validation of CMS for all kinds of disease models or interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Roelof Maarten van Dijk & Ines Koska & Andre Bleich & Rene Tolba & Isabel Seiffert & Christina Möller & Valentina Di Liberto & Steven Roger Talbot & Heidrun Potschka, 2020. "Design of composite measure schemes for comparative severity assessment in animal-based neuroscience research: A case study focussed on rat epilepsy models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0230141
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230141
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0230141
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0230141&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0230141?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul T E Cusack, 2020. "On Pain," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 31(3), pages 24253-24254, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maria Reiber & Lara von Schumann & Verena Buchecker & Lena Boldt & Peter Gass & Andre Bleich & Steven Roger Talbot & Heidrun Potschka, 2023. "Evidence-based comparative severity assessment in young and adult mice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(10), pages 1-27, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sana Sadiq & Khadija Anasse & Najib Slimani, 2022. "The impact of mobile phones on high school students: connecting the research dots," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 30(1), pages 252-270, April.
    2. Jitka Vseteckova, 2020. "Psychological Therapy for ICT Literate Older Adults in the Time of COVID-19 - Perceptions on the Acceptability of Online Versus Face to Face Versions of a Mindfulness for Later Life Group," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 31(1), pages 23912-23916, October.
    3. Khalid Ahmed Al-Ansari & Ahmet Faruk Aysan, 2021. "More than ten years of Blockchain creation: How did we use the technology and which direction is the research heading? [Plus de dix ans de création Blockchain : Comment avons-nous utilisé la techno," Working Papers hal-03343048, HAL.
    4. Ling, Gabriel Hoh Teck & Suhud, Nur Amiera binti Md & Leng, Pau Chung & Yeo, Lee Bak & Cheng, Chin Tiong & Ahmad, Mohd Hamdan Haji & Matusin, AK Mohd Rafiq AK, 2021. "Factors Influencing Asia-Pacific Countries’ Success Level in Curbing COVID-19: A Review Using a Social–Ecological System (SES) Framework," SocArXiv b9f2w, Center for Open Science.
    5. Rafał Krupiński, 2020. "Virtual Reality System and Scientific Visualisation for Smart Designing and Evaluating of Lighting," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Óscar Chiva-Bartoll & Honorato Morente-Oria & Francisco Tomás González-Fernández & Pedro Jesús Ruiz-Montero, 2020. "Anxiety and Bodily Pain in Older Women Participants in a Physical Education Program. A Multiple Moderated Mediation Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-12, May.
    7. Gigi Foster, 2020. "The behavioural economics of government responses to COVID-19," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S3), pages 11-43, December.
    8. Tonata Dengeingei & Laura Uusiku & Olivia N Tuhadeleni & Alice Lifalaza, 2020. "Assessing Knowledge and Practice Regarding the Management of Dysmenorrhea Among Students at University of Namibia Rundu Campus," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(9), pages 105-105, August.
    9. Craig C Kage & Mohsen Akbari-Shandiz & Mary H Foltz & Rebekah L Lawrence & Taycia L Brandon & Nathaniel E Helwig & Arin M Ellingson, 2020. "Validation of an automated shape-matching algorithm for biplane radiographic spine osteokinematics and radiostereometric analysis error quantification," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-15, February.
    10. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Morgan, T. Clifton & Syropoulos, Constantinos & Yotov, Yoto V., 2021. "Understanding economic sanctions: Interdisciplinary perspectives on theory and evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    11. Michael Dolph & Gabriel Tremblay & Hoyee Leong, 2021. "Cost Effectiveness of Triplet Selinexor-Bortezomib-Dexamethasone (XVd) in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (MM) Based on Results from the Phase III BOSTON Trial," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(11), pages 1309-1325, November.
    12. Zack Cooper & Joseph J. Doyle Jr. & John A. Graves & Jonathan Gruber, 2022. "Do Higher-Priced Hospitals Deliver Higher-Quality Care?," NBER Working Papers 29809, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. William Encinosa & Didem Bernard & Thomas M. Selden, 2022. "Opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescribing before and after the CDC’s 2016 opioid guideline," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-52, March.
    14. David G. Blanchflower & Alex Bryson, 2022. "Union Membership Peaks in Midlife," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 60(1), pages 124-151, March.
    15. Jiaxin Li & Zijun Zhou & Jianyu Dong & Ying Fu & Yuan Li & Ze Luan & Xin Peng, 2021. "Predicting breast cancer 5-year survival using machine learning: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-23, April.
    16. Helene Berntzen & Ida Torunn Bjørk & Ann‐Marie Storsveen & Hilde Wøien, 2020. "“Please mind the gap”: A secondary analysis of discomfort and comfort in intensive care," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(13-14), pages 2441-2454, July.
    17. Axel Hallgren & Anders Hansson, 2021. "Conflicting Narratives of Deep Sea Mining," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, May.
    18. Esmail Shariati & Ali Dadgari & Seyedeh Solmaz Talebi & Gholam Reza Mahmoodi Shan & Hossein Ebrahimi, 2021. "The Effect of the Web-Based Communication between a Nurse and a Family Member on the Perceived Stress of the Family Member of Patients with Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19: A Parallel Randomized Clini," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 30(7), pages 1098-1106, September.
    19. Kobayashi, Yoshiharu & Heinrich, Tobias & Bryant, Kristin A., 2021. "Public support for development aid during the COVID-19 pandemic," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    20. Ng Yi Ming & Peter Voo Su Kiong & Ismail Maakip, 2020. "Predictors of Musculoskeletal Disorders Among Teachers: An Exploratory Investigation in Malaysia," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 16(7), pages 1-67, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0230141. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.