Skip to main content
. 2022 Oct 6;9:930005. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.930005

Table 4.

Outcome characteristics for Mouse Grimace Scale (k = 18 studies) and Rat Grimace Scale (k = 29 studies).

Study ID Scored individual action units Range of scores Video/Image based evaluation Time of day
during evaluation
Baseline Significant alteration of grimace scale parameters Evaluated parameter/Comments
Within-subject comparison Between-subject comparison
Mice
Akintola et al. (55) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Cho et al. (54) All Yes Yes Yes Mean difference score
Cho et al. (54) All but whiskers Yes Yes Yes Mean difference score
Dwivedi et al. (69)+ 0–3 Yes Mean score
Evangelista-Vaz et al. (56) Orbital tightening, ear position 0–2 No Yes Composite behavioral score
Faller et al. (57) All 0–2 Yes Yes Mean score
Gallo et al. (58) All 0–2 Yes 07 a.m. to 10 a.m. Yes Yes
Hsi et al. (60) All 0–2 No Mean score
Jirkof et al. (59) Orbital tightening, ear position 0–2 Yes Composite behavioral score
Jirkof et al. (61) Orbital tightening, ear position Yes Composite behavioral score
Langford et al. (33) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean difference score
Leach et al. (25) All but whiskers 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Mai et al. (63) All 0–3 Yes Mean score
Matsumiya et al. (64) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean difference score
Miller et al. (62) All but whiskers Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Redaelli et al. (67) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Roughan et al. (65) All but whiskers 0–2 Yes Yes Yes No Mean score
Sauer et al. (68)+ Orbital tightening, ear position 0–2 Composite behavioral score
Tuttle et al. (66) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score, Mean difference score
Rats
Akintola et al. (55) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes No Mean score
Chaves et al. (71) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Chi et al. (72) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Clemensen et al. (73) All 0–2 No Yes Yes Mean score
De Rantere et al. (74) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Fujita et al. (75) All 0–8 No
Gao et al. (76) 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Guo and Hu (77) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Harikrishnan et al. (78) All Yes 09 a.m. to 3 p.m. Yes Yes Mean difference score
Jeger et al. (94)+ All 0–2 Yes Mean score
Kawano et al. (80) All 0–2 Yes Yes Mean score
Kawano et al. (79) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Kawano et al. (93)+ 0–2 No Mean score
Klune et al. (24) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Korat et al. (81) 0–4 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Korat and Kapupara (70) 0–3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Total score
Koyama et al. (82) 0–2 Yes Yes Mean score
Locatelli et al. (95)+ No Mean score
Nunamaker et al. (83) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Oliver et al. (84) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Philips et al. (85) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Prefontaine et al. (91) All 0–1 Yes Yes Mean score
Saine et al. (86) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Schneider et al. (92)+ All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Sotocinal et al. (34) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Thomas et al. (87) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Waite et al. (88) All Yes Yes Yes Mean difference score
Yamanaka et al. (89) All 0–2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Mean score
Yousef et al. (90) All 0–2 Mean score

–not reported. Alphabetical characters in the Study ID indicate animal groups within individual studies [first column of the tables; e.g., Cho et al. (54)]. +References were identified during screening of reference lists.