Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33945552›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Evaluation of long-term welfare initiatives on working equid welfare and social transmission of knowledge in Mexico.

Emily Haddy, Faith Burden, José Antonio Fernando-Martínez, Dafne Legaria-Ramírez, Zoe Raw, Julia Brown, Juliane Kaminski, Leanne Proops

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

8 authors.

Emily HaddyDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Comparative and Evolutionary Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6696-0088
Faith BurdenThe Donkey Sanctuary, Sidmouth, Devon, United Kingdom.
José Antonio Fernando-MartínezFacultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Programma Donkey Sanctuary-Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, D.F. Mexico, Mexico.
Dafne Legaria-RamírezFacultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Programma Donkey Sanctuary-Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, D.F. Mexico, Mexico.
Zoe RawThe Donkey Sanctuary, Sidmouth, Devon, United Kingdom.
Julia BrownSchool of the Environment, Geography & Geosciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Juliane KaminskiDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Comparative and Evolutionary Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Leanne ProopsDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Comparative and Evolutionary Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8661-1229

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Working equids play an essential role in supporting livelihoods, providing resilience and income security to people around the world, yet their welfare is often poor. Consequently, animal welfare focussed NGOs employ a range of initiatives aimed at improving standards of working equid welfare. However, there is debate surrounding the efficacy of welfare initiatives utilised and long term monitoring and evaluation of initiatives is rarely undertaken. This study compares equid welfare and the social transmission of welfare information across Mexican communities that had previously received differing intervention histories (veterinary treatment plus educational initiatives, veterinary treatment only and control communities) in order to assess their efficacy. Indicators of equid welfare were assessed using the Equid Assessment Research and Scoping tool and included body condition score, skin alterations, lameness, general health status and reaction to observer approach. Owners were interviewed about their involvement in previous welfare initiatives, beliefs regarding equid emotions and pain, and the social transmission of welfare knowledge, including whether they ask advice about their equid or discuss its health with others and whether there is a specific individual that they consider to be 'good with equids' in their community. In total 266 owners were interviewed from 25 communities across three states. Better welfare (specifically body condition and skin alteration scores) was seen in communities where a history of combined free veterinary treatment and educational initiatives had taken place compared to those that had only received veterinary treatment or control communities. The social transfer of welfare knowledge was also higher in these communities, suggesting that the discussion and transfer of equid welfare advice within communities can act as a mechanism to disseminate good welfare practices more widely. Our results suggest that using a combined approach may enhance the success of welfare initiatives, a finding that may impact future NGO programming.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimalsAnimal WelfareEquidaeFemaleHorsesKnowledgeMaleMexico

Identifiers

PMID33945552
PMCPMC8096037

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.