ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2020
Animal Welfare Assessment Protocol for Does, Bucks, and Kit Rabbits Reared for Production.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Welfare Assessment Tool to Harmonize Care and Management for Research Rabbits.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Enhancing Rabbit Welfare in Intensive Production Systems: A Review.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2026Review
- Animal Welfare Certification Schemes in a Knowledge Society: A Fair Transition from Inputs to Outputs as a Driver of Animal Empowerment.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- A review of existing scientific literature on welfare assessment of farmed species applied in commercial practice: identification of strengths, weaknesses, and areas for further development.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
- Application of artificial intelligence in rabbit husbandry: from reproductive monitoring to precision farming.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
- Physical Measures of Welfare in Fin (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Social, ethical, environmental, economic and technological aspects of rabbit meat production - A critical review.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Animal welfare assessment protocol for quails reared for meat production.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Dietary supplementation with n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids: Effects on reproductive and productive performance and meat quality in rabbit breeding.Animal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2023Article
- Review of Rat (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Perceptions of the rabbit as a low investment 'starter pet' lead to negative impacts on its welfare: Results of two Danish surveys.Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2023Article
- Induced Stress and Tactile Stimulation Applied to Primiparous does and their Consequences on Maternal Behavior, Human-Animal Relationships, and Future Offspring's Sexual Disorders.Veterinary research communications · 2022Article
- Welfare of domestic birds and rabbits transported in containers.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2022Article
- A pilot study about on-farm assessment of health and welfare in rabbits kept in different housing systems.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Application of a Protocol to Assess Camel Welfare: Scoring System of Collected Measures, Aggregated Assessment Indices, and Criteria to Classify a Pen.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Testing an Animal Welfare Assessment Protocol for Growing-Rabbits Reared for Meat Production Based on the Welfare Quality Approach.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rabbits are the third species in terms of number of animals reared for meat production in the world. However, in comparison to other species, very few studies have focused on their welfare. The aim of the present study is to implement an animal welfare-assessment protocol developed through a multidimensional approach and containing a number of animal-based measures for bucks, does, and kit rabbits. Thirty Spanish farms with conventional cages in the first year of integration in an animal welfare certification scheme were visited during 2019 and audited by the same auditor. The protocol is divided into four principles and 11 criteria. The Good Feeding principle includes eight parameters (one animal-based), Good Housing includes 15 parameters (six animal-based), Good Health includes 26 parameters (16 animal-based), and Appropriate Behavior contains nine parameters (four animal-based). In general, the main problems found were the absence of platforms, low space allowance and low height of the cage, inappropriate systems for performing emergency killing, insufficient protection of does from other adjacent does when housed individually, and absence of enrichment material. To a minor degree, but also found in an important number of farms, was a lack of temperature data records, high replacement rates of does, and lack of mortality-rate data records. However, in general, most of the farms obtained a good overall score, the maximum found being 73 out of 100 points. Nevertheless, none of the farms reached an excellent score, and four farms were scored below the 55 points required in the animal welfare certification scheme. The Good Feeding principle obtained the highest score, reaching excellent in all farms, and Appropriate Behavior the lowest one, with values ranging from 21 to 41 points out of 100. The results probably show how, for years, rabbit producers have been very focused on feeding needs and very little attention has been paid to behavioral needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.