Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29018530›Full record

ArticleVeterinary record open2017

Benchmarking welfare indicators in 73 free-stall dairy farms in north-western Spain.

Yolanda Trillo, Luis Angel Quintela, Mónica Barrio, Juan José Becerra, Ana Isabel Peña, Marcos Vigo, Pedro Garcia Herradon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary record open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 87% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yolanda TrilloDepartment of Animal Pathology, Unit of Reproduction and Obstetrics, Veterinary Medicine of Lugo, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Luis Angel QuintelaDepartment of Animal Pathology, Unit of Reproduction and Obstetrics, Veterinary Medicine of Lugo, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Mónica BarrioDepartment of Animal Pathology, Unit of Reproduction and Obstetrics, Veterinary Medicine of Lugo, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Juan José BecerraDepartment of Animal Pathology, Unit of Reproduction and Obstetrics, Veterinary Medicine of Lugo, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Ana Isabel PeñaDepartment of Animal Pathology, Unit of Reproduction and Obstetrics, Veterinary Medicine of Lugo, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Marcos VigoDepartment of Animal Pathology, Unit of Reproduction and Obstetrics, Veterinary Medicine of Lugo, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Pedro Garcia HerradonDepartment of Animal Pathology, Unit of Reproduction and Obstetrics, Veterinary Medicine of Lugo, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to describe the status of body condition score (BCS), hock injuries prevalence, locomotion and body hygiene score as animal welfare measures in 73 free-stall dairy cattle farms in Lugo (Spain). A benchmarking process was established across farms: (1) the animal-based indicators were ordered from low to high values; (2) The farms were classified into three categories based on the number of indicators within less than the 25th percentile, 25th to 75th percentile and above the 75th percentile. The median prevalence of unsuitable BCS, hock injuries and clinical lameness was (median (range)) 51.7 per cent (13.3 to 89.5 per cent), 40.0 per cent (7.0per cent to 100 per cent) and 9.0 per cent (0per cent to 60.0 per cent) respectively. The dirtiness of the cow's coat had a high prevalence (73.0 per cent (37.5per cent to 100 per cent)). Most farms did not display consistently good or poor animal-based indicators and each farm had its own set of strong and weak points. Moreover, facilities design and management practices were described to understand source of the observations made of the cows. The incidence of overstocking was 31.5 per cent for stalls and 26.0 per cent for headlocks. The front lunge space was reduced (<90 cm) on most dairies (90.4 per cent). Signs of poor natural ventilation (cobwebs or humidity on the roof) and ammonia odour were observed on 32.8 per cent and 85.0 per cent of the barns totally closed or with a side openingless than 50 per cent of the wall height. The milking parlour was designed with two or more turns more than 90° (9.3 per cent), and failed to allow cows to see the parlour before entering (45.2 per cent). On 52.0 per cent of dairies, more than 15 per cent of the cows had to be forcefully moved into the milking parlour. In conclusion, there was a big variation in the animal welfare levels within and across farms and they could benefit from others by changing management practices related to facilities and herds.

Indexed as

cow comfortfacilities designherd scoringmanagement practiceson-farm assessment

Identifiers

PMID29018530
PMCPMC5623328
OpenAlexW2758576374

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.