Lauren Nicotra, Jonathan Tuke, Peter M. Grace, Paul E. Rolan, Mark R. Hutchinson
Abstract
Translating promising preclinical drug discoveries to successful clinical trials remains a significant hurdle in pain research. Although animal models have significantly contributed to understanding chronic pain pathophysiology, the majority of research has focused on male rodents using testing procedures that produce sex difference data that do not align well with comparable clinical experiences. Additionally, the use of animal pain models presents ongoing ethical challenges demanding continuing refinement of preclinical methods. To this end, this study sought to test a quantitative allodynia assessment technique and associated statistical analysis in a modified graded nerve injury pain model with the aim to further examine sex differences in allodynia. Graded allodynia was established in male and female Sprague Dawley rats by altering the number of sutures placed around the sciatic nerve and quantified by the von Frey test. Linear mixed effects modeling regressed response on each fixed effect (sex, oestrus cycle, pain treatment). On comparison with other common von Frey assessment techniques, utilizing lower threshold filaments than those ordinarily tested, at 1 s intervals, appropriately and successfully investigated female mechanical allodynia, revealing significant sex and oestrus cycle difference across the graded allodynia that other common behavioral methods were unable to detect. Utilizing this different von Frey approach and graded allodynia model, a single suture inflicting less allodynia was sufficient to demonstrate exaggerated female mechanical allodynia throughout the phases of dioestrus and pro-oestrus. Refining the von Frey testing method, statistical analysis technique and the use of a graded model of chronic pain, allowed for examination of the influences on female mechanical nociception that other von Frey methods cannot provide.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
5
6%
Psychology
4
4%
Other
14
16%
Unknown
24
27%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 April 2014.
All research outputs
#14,194,875
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,885
of 3,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,640
of 305,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#38
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 305,238 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
