Development of a deep learning-based grid walking test for assessing post-stroke motor function in mice.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience Pub Date : 2026-08-03 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fnbeh.2026.1873231
Monika Maciag, Vardan T Karamyan
{"title":"Development of a deep learning-based grid walking test for assessing post-stroke motor function in mice.","authors":"Monika Maciag, Vardan T Karamyan","doi":"10.3389/fnbeh.2026.1873231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability, affecting over 15 million people each year. Developing effective therapies depends on accurate, scalable methods to assess sensorimotor recovery in preclinical models. Standard motor tests like grid walking and ladder tests rely on manual scoring, limiting objectivity and throughput. To address this, we compared a commercially available automated ladder test with a newly developed deep learning-based grid walking test using DeepLabCut (DLC) in a photothrombotic stroke model in mice. Our results show that the automated ladder test system failed to detect significant unilateral deficits in stroke animals. It did not capture the expected increase in missteps in the affected forepaw after stroke, even though motor cortex infarcts were confirmed histologically, and the functional impairment was apparent with manual scoring in the grid walking test. In contrast, our DLC-based grid walking model provided fully automated quantification of this widely used test. It achieved millimeter-scale tracking accuracy and detected a ∼3-fold increase in foot faults in stroke-affected mice compared to controls, clearly differentiating between affected and unaffected forepaws for at least 2 weeks post-stroke. These findings expose the limitations of the commercial automated ladder test and demonstrate that the DLC-based pose-estimation-assisted misstep quantification in grid-walk test provides greater sensitivity for detecting motor deficit.</p>","PeriodicalId":12368,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience","volume":"20 ","pages":"1873231"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13478089/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2026.1873231","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability, affecting over 15 million people each year. Developing effective therapies depends on accurate, scalable methods to assess sensorimotor recovery in preclinical models. Standard motor tests like grid walking and ladder tests rely on manual scoring, limiting objectivity and throughput. To address this, we compared a commercially available automated ladder test with a newly developed deep learning-based grid walking test using DeepLabCut (DLC) in a photothrombotic stroke model in mice. Our results show that the automated ladder test system failed to detect significant unilateral deficits in stroke animals. It did not capture the expected increase in missteps in the affected forepaw after stroke, even though motor cortex infarcts were confirmed histologically, and the functional impairment was apparent with manual scoring in the grid walking test. In contrast, our DLC-based grid walking model provided fully automated quantification of this widely used test. It achieved millimeter-scale tracking accuracy and detected a ∼3-fold increase in foot faults in stroke-affected mice compared to controls, clearly differentiating between affected and unaffected forepaws for at least 2 weeks post-stroke. These findings expose the limitations of the commercial automated ladder test and demonstrate that the DLC-based pose-estimation-assisted misstep quantification in grid-walk test provides greater sensitivity for detecting motor deficit.

开发一种基于深度学习的网格行走测试,用于评估小鼠中风后运动功能。
中风是导致死亡和残疾的主要原因,每年影响1500多万人。开发有效的治疗方法依赖于准确的、可扩展的方法来评估临床前模型中的感觉运动恢复。标准的电机测试,如网格行走和阶梯测试依赖于手动评分,限制了客观性和吞吐量。为了解决这个问题,我们将市售的自动阶梯测试与新开发的基于深度学习的网格行走测试进行了比较,该测试使用DeepLabCut (DLC)在小鼠光血栓性中风模型中进行。我们的研究结果表明,自动阶梯测试系统未能检测出中风动物的显著单侧缺陷。它并没有捕捉到中风后前爪失足的预期增加,即使运动皮质梗死在组织学上得到证实,并且在网格行走测试中手动评分的功能损伤是明显的。相比之下,我们基于dlc的网格行走模型为这种广泛使用的测试提供了完全自动化的量化。它达到了毫米级的跟踪精度,并检测到中风小鼠的足部缺陷比对照组增加了约3倍,在中风后至少2周内清楚地区分了受影响和未受影响的前爪。这些发现揭示了商用自动阶梯测试的局限性,并证明了基于dlc的姿态估计辅助失误量化在网格行走测试中为检测运动缺陷提供了更高的灵敏度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES-NEUROSCIENCES
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
506
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience is a leading journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research that advances our understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying behavior. Field Chief Editor Nuno Sousa at the Instituto de Pesquisa em Ciências da Vida e da Saúde (ICVS) is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international experts. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide. This journal publishes major insights into the neural mechanisms of animal and human behavior, and welcomes articles studying the interplay between behavior and its neurobiological basis at all levels: from molecular biology and genetics, to morphological, biochemical, neurochemical, electrophysiological, neuroendocrine, pharmacological, and neuroimaging studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书