Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28684801›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Characterization of short- and long-term mechanical sensitisation following surgical tail amputation in pigs.

Pierpaolo Di Giminiani, Sandra A Edwards, Emma M Malcolm, Matthew C Leach, Mette S Herskin, Dale A Sandercock

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. On determining the mechanical nociceptive threshold in pigs: a reliability study.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  9. Welfare of pigs on farm.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Pierpaolo Di GiminianiSchool of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom. Pierpaolo.Di-Giminiani@newcastle.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-5280-4471
Sandra A EdwardsSchool of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom.
Emma M MalcolmSchool of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom.
Matthew C LeachSchool of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom.
Mette S HerskinAarhus University, Department of Animal Science, Au-Foulum, Tjele, Denmark.
Dale A SandercockAnimal and Veterinary Science Research Group, Scotland's Rural College (SRUC), West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH16 4SA, United Kingdom.
Newcastle University · GBAarhus University · DKScotland's Rural College · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L0/3606/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Commercial pigs are frequently exposed to tail mutilations in the form of preventive husbandry procedures (tail docking) or as a result of abnormal behaviour (tail biting). Although tissue and nerve injuries are well-described causes of pain hypersensitivity in humans and in rodent animal models, there is no information on the changes in local pain sensitivity induced by tail injuries in pigs. To determine the temporal profile of sensitisation, pigs were exposed to surgical tail resections and mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNT) were measured in the acute (one week post-operatively) and in the long-term (either eight or sixteen weeks post-surgery) phase of recovery. The influence of the degree of amputation on MNTs was also evaluated by comparing three different tail-resection treatments (intact, 'short tail', 'long tail'). A significant reduction in MNTs one week following surgery suggests the occurrence of acute sensitisation. Long-term hypersensitivity was also observed in tail-resected pigs at either two or four months following surgery. Tail amputation in pigs appears to evoke acute and sustained changes in peripheral mechanical sensitivity, which resemble features of neuropathic pain reported in humans and other species and provides new information on implications for the welfare of animals subjected to this type of injury.

Indexed as

Central Nervous System SensitizationAmputation, SurgicalAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnimal WelfareFemaleNeuralgiaPain ThresholdSwineTailTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID28684801
PMCPMC5500571
OpenAlexW2732192779

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.