Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31614498›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2019

What Is so Positive about Positive Animal Welfare?-A Critical Review of the Literature.

Alistair B Lawrence, Belinda Vigors, Peter Sandøe

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Rehoming Laboratory Rats: Exploring Perceptions of Rehomers, Animal Technicians, and Biomedical Researchers.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Relevance of state-behaviour feedbacks for animal welfare.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  14. A framework for a comprehensive animal welfare label: scientific, logistic, and ethical challenges.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Assessing and Improving Animal Welfare Using Applied Ethology.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Alistair B LawrenceScotland's Rural College (SRUC), West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3RG, UK. alistair.lawrence@sruc.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2083-4243
Belinda VigorsScotland's Rural College (SRUC), West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3RG, UK. belinda.vigors@sruc.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-9303-4784
Peter SandøeDepartment of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark. pes@sund.ku.dk.ORCID 0000-0003-0397-3273

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/N010760/1Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division Strategic Research Programme 2016-2021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is claimed that positive animal welfare (PAW) developed over the last decade in reaction to animal welfare focusing too much on avoiding negatives. However, it remains unclear what PAW adds to the animal welfare literature and to what extent its ideas are new. Through a critical review of the PAW literature, we aim to separate different aspects of PAW and situate it in relation to the traditional animal welfare literature. We find that the core PAW literature is small (

Indexed as

critical reviewhappinesspositive affective engagementpositive animal welfarepositive emotionsquality of life

Identifiers

PMID31614498
PMCPMC6826906

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.