Traumatic brain injury (TBI) induces cognitive deficits clinically and in animal models. Learning and memory testing is critical when evaluating potential therapeutic strategies and treatments to manage the effects of TBI. We evaluated three data analysis methods for the Morris water maze (MWM), a learning and memory assessment widely used in the neurotrauma field, to determine which statistical tool is optimal for MWM data. Hidden platform spatial MWM data aggregated from three separate experiments from the same laboratory were analyzed using 1) a logistic regression model, 2) an analysis of variance (ANOVA) model, and 3) an accelerated failure time (AFT) time-to-event model. The logistic regression model showed no significant evidence of differences between treatments among any swims over all days of the study, p > 0.11. Although the ANOVA model found significant evidence of differences between sham and TBI groups on three out of four swims on the third day, results are potentially biased due to the failure of this model to account for censoring. The time-to-event AFT model showed significant differences between sham and TBI over all swims on the third day, p < 0.045, taking censoring into account. We suggest AFT models should be the preferred analytical methodology for latency to platform associated with MWM studies.

中文翻译：

---

用于分析莫里斯水迷宫延迟数据的加速故障时间生存模型

外伤性脑损伤 (TBI) 在临床和动物模型中诱导认知缺陷。在评估潜在的治疗策略和治疗以管理 TBI 的影响时，学习和记忆测试至关重要。我们评估了莫里斯水迷宫 (MWM) 的三种数据分析方法，这是一种广泛用于神经创伤领域的学习和记忆评估，以确定哪种统计工具最适合 MWM 数据。使用 1) 逻辑回归模型、2) 方差分析 (ANOVA) 模型和 3) 加速故障时间 (AFT) 时间到事件分析从同一实验室的三个独立实验聚合的隐藏平台空间 MWM 数据模型。逻辑回归模型显示，在研究的所有天数中，任何游泳之间的治疗之间没有显着差异的证据，p > 0.11。尽管 ANOVA 模型在第三天的四次游泳中的三次游泳中发现了假手术组和 TBI 组之间存在差异的显着证据，但由于该模型未能解释审查，结果可能存在偏差。时间到事件 AFT 模型在第三天的所有游泳中显示假和 TBI 之间的显着差异，p  < 0.045，考虑到审查。我们建议 AFT 模型应该是与 MWM 研究相关的平台延迟的首选分析方法。