Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27303674›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2016

Behavioral Differences of Laying Hens with Fractured Keel Bones within Furnished Cages.

Teresa M Casey-Trott, Tina M Widowski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Keel Bone Damage in Commercial Laying Hen Hybrids.Veterinary medicine and science · 2025
    Review
  4. Relevance of state-behaviour feedbacks for animal welfare.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Hot-headed peckers: thermographic changes during aggression among juvenile pheasants (Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Teresa M Casey-TrottAnimal Biosciences, University of Guelph , Guelph, ON , Canada.
Tina M WidowskiAnimal Biosciences, University of Guelph , Guelph, ON , Canada.
University of Guelph · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High prevalence of keel bone fractures in laying hens is reported in all housing systems. Keel fractures have been associated with pain and restricted mobility in hens in loose housing. The objective was to determine whether keel fractures were associated with activity of hens in furnished cages. Thirty-six pairs of LSL-Lite hens (72 weeks) were enrolled in the study. One hen with a fractured keel and one hen without were identified by palpation in each of 36 groups of hens housed in either 30- or 60-bird cages stocked at 750 cm(2)/hen. Behavioral activity of each hen was recorded by four observers blind to keel status using focal animal sampling for 10 min within a 2-h period in the morning (08:00-10:00), afternoon (12:00-14:00), and evening (17:00-19:00). All hens were observed during each of the three sample periods for 3 days totaling 90 min, and individual hen data were summed for analysis. Hens were euthanized 48 h after final observations, dissected, and classified by keel status: F 0 (no fracture, N = 24), F 1 (single fracture, N = 17), and F 2 (multiple fractures, N = 31). The percentages of time hens performed each behavior were analyzed using a mixed procedure in SAS with fracture severity, body weight, cage size, rearing environment, and tier in the model. Fracture severity affected the duration of perching (P = 0.04) and standing (P = 0.001), bout length of standing (P < 0.0001), and location (floor vs. perch) of resting behaviors (P = 0.01). F 2 hens perched longer than F 0 hens, 20.0 ± 2.9 and 11.6 ± 3.2%. F 2 hens spent less time standing, 15.2 ± 1.5%, than F 0 and F 1 hens, 20.7 ± 1.6 and 21.6 ± 1.8%. F 2 hens had shorter standing bouts (22.0 ± 4.2 s) than both F 0 and F 1 hens, 33.1 ± 4.3 and 27.4 ± 4.4 s. Non-fractured hens spent 80.0 ± 6.9% of total resting time on the floor, whereas F 1 and F 2 hens spent 56.9 ± 12.4 and 51.5 ± 7.7% resting on the floor. Behavioral differences reported here provide insight into possible causes of keel damage, or alternatively, indicate a coping strategy used to offset pain or restricted mobility caused by keel fractures.

Indexed as

behavioral changecausationfurnished cagekeel bone fracturepainresting location

Identifiers

PMID27303674
PMCPMC4885835
OpenAlexW2409832949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.