Cited by 16Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics

Alterations in Daytime and Nighttime Activity in Piglets after Focal and Diffuse Brain Injury

Open access
Olson, Emily, Badder, Carlie, Sullivan, Sarah, Smith, Colin, Propert, Kathleen, Margulies, Susan S.·2016·Journal of Neurotrauma

Abstract

We have developed and implemented a noninvasive, objective neurofunctional assessment for evaluating the sustained effects of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in piglets with both diffuse and focal injury types. Derived from commercial actigraphy methods in humans, this assessment continuously monitors the day/night activity of piglets using close-fitting jackets equipped with tri-axial accelerometers to monitor movements of the thorax. Acceleration metrics were correlated (N = 7 naïve piglets) with video images to define values associated with a range of activities, from recumbancy (rest) to running. Both focal (N = 8) and diffuse brain injury (N = 9) produced alterations in activity that were significant 4 days post-TBI. Compared to shams (N = 6) who acclimated to the animal facility 4 days after an anesthesia experience by blurring the distinction between day and night activity, post-TBI time-matched animals had larger fractions of inactive periods during the daytime than nighttime, and larger fractions of active time in the night were spent in high activity (e.g., constant walking, intermittent running) than during the day. These persistent disturbances in rest and activity are similar to those observed in human adults and children post-TBI, establishing actigraphy as a translational metric, used in both humans and large animals, for assessment of injury severity, progressions, and intervention.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/neu.2015.4085

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Animal models recapitulate sleep phenotypes of disordered sleep in humans, especially excessive daytime sleepiness.

    “Animal models recapitulate sleep phenotypes of disordered sleep in humans, especially that of EDS.22,44,45,48,49,64–73”

    From Effects of Traumatic Brain Injury on the Orexin/Hypocretin System (2025) · cites this paper as [68]

    The Abstract and Discussion report that brain-injured piglets showed increased daytime inactivity and disrupted nighttime rest, resembling disturbances observed in humans after TBI. But the Discussion says the actigraphy measure cannot distinguish quiet wakefulness from sleep, so the study does not establish excessive daytime sleepiness itself. Its findings also concern piglets after TBI, rather than animal models generally. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [1]1. Institute of Medicine (IOM) and National Research Council (NRC). (2014). Sports-Related Concussions in Youth: Improving the Science, Changing the Culture . National Academies Press: Washington, DC.
  2. [9]9. Zollman, F.S., Cyborski, C., and Duraski, S.A. (2010). Actigraphy for assessment of sleep in traumatic brain injury: case series, review of the literature and proposed criteria for use. Brain Inj. 24, 748-754.
  3. [23]23. Dickerson, J., and Dobbing, J. (1967). Prenatal and postnatal growth and development of the central nervous system of the pig. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 166, 384-395.
  4. [30]30. Zollman, F.S., Cyborski, C., and Duraski, S.A. (2010). Actigraphy for assessment of sleep in traumatic brain injury: case series, review of the literature and proposed criteria for use. Brain Inj. 24, 748754.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Olson, E., Badder, C., Sullivan, S., Smith, C., Propert, K., & Margulies, S. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Margulies, Susan S.
Venue
Journal of Neurotrauma
Published
2016-04-15
Volume
33
Issue
8
Pages
734-740
ISSN
  • 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9042
OpenAlex
W1750732882
Cited by
16
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurotrauma (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01-NS39679, U01NS069545, R01NS039679)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Automotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, actigraphy, piglets, focal brain injury, diffuse brain injury, circadian activity, triaxial accelerometer, injury severity, translational animal model
MeSH terms
Brain Injuries, Diffuse, Animals, Animals, Newborn, Brain Injuries, Circadian Rhythm, Female, Humans, Motor Activity, Swine, Actigraphy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review