Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31998770›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2019

Prioritization of Farm Animal Welfare Issues Using Expert Consensus.

Fiona C Rioja-Lang, Melanie Connor, Heather J Bacon, Alistair B Lawrence, Cathy M Dwyer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. "If you have livestock…" Experiences in training farmers and farm workers to perform euthanasia.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fiona C Rioja-LangJeanne Marchig International Centre for Animal Welfare Education, The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian, United Kingdom.
Melanie ConnorJeanne Marchig International Centre for Animal Welfare Education, The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian, United Kingdom.
Heather J BaconJeanne Marchig International Centre for Animal Welfare Education, The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian, United Kingdom.
Alistair B LawrenceAnimal Behaviour and Welfare, Animal and Veterinary Sciences Group, Scotland's Rural College, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Cathy M DwyerJeanne Marchig International Centre for Animal Welfare Education, The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian, United Kingdom.
University of Edinburgh · GBScotland's Rural College · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/N010760/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prioritization of animal welfare issues can help identify which areas most require research funding and raise awareness of best practices. A modified Delphi method was used to obtain expert opinion on the highest priority welfare issues for UK farmed livestock. Fifty-eight UK-based experts were recruited onto the study, with a minimum of 3 years experience of working with either cattle, pigs, poultry, or small ruminants (12-16 experts per group). Experts were chosen to represent a broad range of opinions. Two rounds of surveys were conducted online using Online Survey, and the final round was an in-person workshop with 21 experts. In the first survey, experts were provided with a comprehensive list of species-specific welfare issues derived from the literature. Participants were asked to score each welfare issue, for (i) severity, (ii) duration, and (iii) prevalence on a 6-point Likert scale. The results of the first survey were reviewed and the welfare issues which scored a neutral-to-high response (scores 3-6) were carried forward. In round 2, participants were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the rankings that were made from the results of round 1. The final stage of the process was a workshop, which consisted of a combination of group exercises and discussions, to reach the final consensus. Welfare priority lists were divided into two categories: severity/duration, and prevalence, to identify the priority welfare issues affecting individual animals and the population, respectively. Across all farmed species common concerns were inadequate or inappropriate nutrition, inability of stockpeople to recognize or treat welfare issues (such as pain or behavioral problems), lameness, chronic or endemic health issues, euthanasia and mortality and morbidity of neonates. Specific concerns related to behavioral restriction and damaging or abnormal behavior in pigs, poultry and dairy animals, inadequate housing for pigs and poultry, consequences of breeding decisions in pigs and poultry, and lack of access to veterinary care in sheep and beef. This Delphi process resulted in consensus on the most significant welfare challenges faced by UK livestock species and can help to guide future research and education priority decisions.

Indexed as

animal welfarebehaviorcattleDelphi methodhealthpigspoultrysheep

Identifiers

PMID31998770
PMCPMC6967597
OpenAlexW2999095687

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.