General Description

Rate my model is a tool to assess the overall plausibility of your animal model regarding your question/goal of research.

The evaluation comprises 3 steps to complete:

Experimental context: describe your research context and your scientific question by typing short text.
Internal validity: estimate the fiability of your measures, assess your interpretations, and evaluate the robustness of your results.
External validity: explicit and assess the degree of similarities between your model and its target(s) at different biological level.

The score of each criteria: assigned by yourself (-3 to 3).
- to give yourself a general idea of the strengths and weaknessess.
The weight of each criteria: assigned by yourself (0 to 3).
- 0: the criteria is non applicable (NA) to your model
- 1: the importance of the criteria is low in assessing the plausibility of your model
- 2: intermediate importance
- 3: key aspect of your model

About score and weight (steps 2 and 3)

More information and instructions

You can add other criteria to evaluate specificities of your model not taken into account by the general criteria proposed.
Add comments to justify each attributed score and associated weight.

⚠ Please run the evaluation for only ONE model and its associated experimental protocol & research question at a time. ⚠
One evaluation : one question of research, and one evaluator.
If your model can be used to study several phenomena, please repeat the evaluation for each of the phenomena.

Research Question

What research question will the animal model and associated experimental protocol answer?

Be as precise and concise as possible (one or two sentences, choose one general function of your model you want to evaluate.)

Level(s) of study

For your specific research question, which biological level do you want to investigate with your animal model? (ex : molecular, behavioral, cellular, organ...)

Why did you choose this species and strain?

Precise :

1) why did you choose this species and strain,

and 2) if the strain used is inbred or not, and why.

About your conceptual background and you protocoles

Tell us more about:

Your conceptual background
The experimental protocoles used

A distinction can be made between:

- inter experimenter reliability: two experimenters or measuring instruments obtain the same result on the same individual.

- inter-tester reliability: the same experimenter obtains the same result by making repeated observations on the same individual.

Evaluate the more relevant for your experiment.

Reliability of your measures

Accuracy

Do the measurements correspond to, or are they close to, the actual value?
3: as far as we know the value is accurate
-3: the value is under or sur-estimated.

Score

Weight

Comments

Precision

Estimate the degree of consistency of your device, your evaluation method, or your test.
3: all experimenters / all repeated observations on the same individual are the same.

Score

Weight

Comments

Specificity and sensibility

Balance between the probability of false negative and probability of false positive.
0: your measure is both specific and sensitive.
3: specific but less sensitive
-3: sensitive but less specific.

Score

Weight

Comments

Assess the risk of the inference from data to phenomena

Robustness of your results

Data interpretation

From data (e.g. caspase signal), you infer a biological phenomena (cellular death). How risky you consider your inference?

-3 : very risky
3: certain

Score

Weight

Comments

Score

Weight

Repetability of your results

Same team, same protocols

Replicability of your results

Same team, different protocols

Score

Weight

General comments about robustness

Reproductibility of your results

Different team, different protocols

Score

Weight

Homology

Estimate two things: the relevance of the species you are using and your choice of a particular strain (if available), according to your research question and the type of your model.

Genetic distance

Strain

Comments

Face Validity

Estimate "the similarity of what is observed in the animal model to what is observed in the human modeled organism."

Ethological validity:

"similarity of behaviors related to the presumed (...) organism. Meaning matters more than the material similarity."

E.g.: "nest building activity of the rodent can be taken as an analogue of the daily activity of the human."

Biomarker validity:

"similarity of biological markers related to the presume organism. Function matters more than the chemical composition."

E.g.: glucocorticods

Weight

Comments

Ethological

Biomarker

Score

Example: for a biomedical research model aiming at testing a drug, a genetic proximity to humans and the selection of a genetic line presenting characteristics of the modeled disease could be favored (high score, hight weight).Conversely, this phylogenetic proximity to humans and the characteristics of the lineage will not be of much interest for a basic research model (the attributed weight could be close to 0 in thise case).

"The predictive validity of an animal model is the similarity of the relation between, on the one hand, the triggering factors and the occurrence of the disease and, on the other hand, between the therapeutic agent and the disease. Roughly speaking, it is the resemblance of the apparent impact of the etiological factors and of the treatment on the observable effects."

Example: for a biomedical research model aiming at testing a drug, a genetic proximity to humans and the selection of a genetic line presenting characteristics of the modeled disease could be favored (high score, hight weight).Conversely, this phylogenetic proximity to humans and the characteristics of the lineage will not be of much interest for a basic research model (the attributed weight could be close to 0 in thise case).

Predictive Validity

Estimate the similarity of the relation between:

1) the triggering factors and the occurrence of the disease (induction)

2) the therapeutic agent and the disease (remission)

Induction

Induction validity: "the action of the etiological factors on the observable effects of the modeldisease resemble its action on the observable effects ofthe human disease.

For example, if chronic stress triggersdepression-related biomarkers both in humans andin animals, an animal model based on the chronic applicationof stressors may have good induction validity."

Score

Weight

Remission

Remission validity: the action of the treatment on the observable effects in the animal model may resemble its action on the observable effects in the human disease.

For example, if chronic antidepressants induce remission inhumans, they should elicit the same effects in the animalmodel to score high on remission validity.

Score

Weight

Comments

Score

Weight

Example: for a biomedical research model aiming at testing a drug, a genetic proximity to humans and the selection of a genetic line presenting characteristics of the modeled disease could be favored (high score, hight weight).Conversely, this phylogenetic proximity to humans and the characteristics of the lineage will not be of much interest for a basic research model (the attributed weight could be close to 0 in thise case).

Score

Weight

Score

Weight

Comments

Score

Weight

Comments

Mecanistic Validity

Estimate the similarity of the mechanisms you suppose is working in the animal to the mechanism that is presumed to be working in the humans.

Precise which kind of mechanisms you are thinking of in comments.

"The mechanistic validity of an animal model assesses the similarity of the mechanism we suppose or know is working in the animal disease to the mechanism that is or is presumed to be working in the human disease.

It refers at the same time to the mechanism that we think is producing the symptoms and biological markers, and to the mechanism we think is sensitive to the action of effective therapeutic agents. This mechanism can be either cognitive or neurobiological."

Cognitive

Spatial learning deficits, increased motivation, impaired mempry...

Score

Weight

Comments

Biological

Neuronal hypertrophy, protein dysfunction, molecular pathway...

Score

Weight

Comments

Pathogenic Validity

Estimate the similarity of the processes that lead to disease.

1) Onthopathogenic validity: early environmental factor which produces a vulnerable organism

2) Triggering validity: factors occurring during adulthood.

"The pathogenic validity of a model assesses the similarity of the processes that lead to disease. It thus seems useful to contrast ontopathogenic validity, that is, early environmental factors whose interaction with the initial organism produces a vulnerable organism according to the theory of diathesis, with triggering validity, that is, the similarity of triggering factors occurring during adulthood whose interactions with either a vulnerable or
an initial organism produces a pathological organism."

"Etiological factors do not have to be materially similar (from a biochemical point of view), but rather semantically similar (what they mean to an organism)."

E.g : "a cat might elicit fear in rodents, while in humans a white bear might induce the same state. The two stimuli (cat and bear) are not materially identical, but have the same meaning (threat) in the rodents and the humans world."

Early

E.g. : "maternal care deprivation is generally considered an early environmental factor rendering the subject vulnerable to depressive-like states in adulthood and, thus, has good ontopathogenic validity."

Comments

Adulthood

Score

Weight

Comments

Your model

SEND YOUR RESULTS!

Research question

Je suis un paragraphe. Cliquez ici pour ajouter votre propre texte et me modifier. C'est facile.

Level of study

Je suis un paragraphe. Cliquez ici pour ajouter votre propre texte et me modifier. C'est facile.

Type of model

Je suis un paragraphe. Cliquez ici pour ajouter votre propre texte et me modifier. C'est facile.

Who you are

Je suis un paragraphe. Cliquez ici pour ajouter votre propre texte et me modifier. C'est facile.

Rate my model

A tool for scientists and philosophers to think about their non-human animal models and have conceptual keys to improve them

General Description

About score and weight (steps 2 and 3)

More information and instructions