↓ Skip to main content

Coding of facial expressions of pain in the laboratory mouse

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Methods, May 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
1036 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1631 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Coding of facial expressions of pain in the laboratory mouse
Published in
Nature Methods, May 2010
DOI 10.1038/nmeth.1455
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dale J Langford, Andrea L Bailey, Mona Lisa Chanda, Sarah E Clarke, Tanya E Drummond, Stephanie Echols, Sarah Glick, Joelle Ingrao, Tammy Klassen-Ross, Michael L LaCroix-Fralish, Lynn Matsumiya, Robert E Sorge, Susana G Sotocinal, John M Tabaka, David Wong, Arn M J M van den Maagdenberg, Michel D Ferrari, Kenneth D Craig, Jeffrey S Mogil

Abstract

Facial expression is widely used as a measure of pain in infants; whether nonhuman animals display such pain expressions has never been systematically assessed. We developed the mouse grimace scale (MGS), a standardized behavioral coding system with high accuracy and reliability; assays involving noxious stimuli of moderate duration are accompanied by facial expressions of pain. This measure of spontaneously emitted pain may provide insight into the subjective pain experience of mice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,631 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 12 <1%
Germany 9 <1%
France 5 <1%
United Kingdom 5 <1%
Japan 4 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Netherlands 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
Other 15 <1%
Unknown 1569 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 272 17%
Researcher 258 16%
Student > Master 198 12%
Student > Bachelor 183 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 83 5%
Other 248 15%
Unknown 389 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 417 26%
Neuroscience 183 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 145 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 115 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 96 6%
Other 238 15%
Unknown 437 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 277. 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 27 May 2023.
All research outputs
#129,215
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Nature Methods
#70
of 5,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283
of 104,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Methods
#3
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,364 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
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 104,315 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.