Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 166

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Automated quantitative gait analysis in animal models of movement disorders

Open access
Vandeputte, Caroline, Taymans, Jean-Marc, Casteels, Cindy, Coun, Frea, Ni, Yicheng, Van Laere, Koen, Baekelandt, Veerle·2010·BMC Neuroscience

Abstract

Background: Accurate and reproducible behavioral tests in animal models are of major importance in the development and evaluation of new therapies for central nervous system disease. In this study we investigated for the first time gait parameters of rat models for Parkinson's disease (PD), Huntington's disease (HD) and stroke using the Catwalk method, a novel automated gait analysis test. Static and dynamic gait parameters were measured in all animal models, and these data were compared to readouts of established behavioral tests, such as the cylinder test in the PD and stroke rats and the rotarod tests for the HD group. Results: Hemiparkinsonian rats were generated by unilateral injection of the neurotoxin 6-hydroxydopamine in the striatum or in the medial forebrain bundle. For Huntington's disease, a transgenic rat model expressing a truncated huntingtin fragment with multiple CAG repeats was used. Thirdly, a stroke model was generated by a photothrombotic induced infarct in the right sensorimotor cortex. We found that multiple gait parameters were significantly altered in all three disease models compared to their respective controls. Behavioural deficits could be efficiently measured using the cylinder test in the PD and stroke animals, and in the case of the PD model, the deficits in gait essentially confirmed results obtained by the cylinder test. However, in the HD model and the stroke model the Catwalk analysis proved more sensitive than the rotarod test and also added new and more detailed information on specific gait parameters. Conclusion: The automated quantitative gait analysis test may be a useful tool to study both motor impairment and recovery associated with various neurological motor disorders.

Overview

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 · 10.1186/1471-2202-11-92

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 166

Metadata

Authors
Vandeputte, C., Taymans, J.-M., Casteels, C., Coun, F., Ni, Y., Van Laere, K., & Baekelandt, V.
Venue
BMC Neuroscience
Published
2010-08-09
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
92-92
ISSN
1471-2202 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2003203844
Cited by
166
References
4
FWCI
6.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automated quantitative gait analysis in animal models of movement disorders. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2202-11-92
The paper
Vandeputte, C., Taymans, J.-M., Casteels, C., Coun, F., Ni, Y., Van Laere, K., & Baekelandt, V. (2010). Automated quantitative gait analysis in animal models of movement disorders. BMC Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-11-92

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.