Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34748623›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2021

Relationship of tissue dimensions and three captive bolt placements on cadaver heads from mature swine (Sus scrofa domesticus) > 200 kg body weight.

Karly N Anderson, Kaysie J Allen, Angela Baysinger, Madonna Benjamin, Jennifer Berger, James R Claus, Brian J Greco, Emily A Massie, Brett O'Brien, Alejandro Ramirez and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Karly N AndersonDepartment of Animal and Food Science, University of Wisconsin-River Falls, River Falls, WI 54022, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4997-997X
Kaysie J AllenDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
Angela BaysingerVeterinary and Consumer Affairs, Merck Animal Health, Madison, NJ 07930, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0155-178X
Madonna BenjaminDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University-East Lansing, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9731-2139
Jennifer BergerAbbyland Pork Pack, Curtiss, WI 54422, USA.
James R ClausDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9024-5391
Brian J GrecoDepartment of Animal and Food Science, University of Wisconsin-River Falls, River Falls, WI 54022, USA.
Emily A MassieDepartment of Animal and Food Science, University of Wisconsin-River Falls, River Falls, WI 54022, USA.
Brett O'BrienMerck Animal Health, Lenexa, KS 66219, USA.
Alejandro RamirezDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8123-2131
Aaron K RendahlDepartment of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5434-3592
Arquimides A ReyesDepartment of Animal and Food Science, University of Wisconsin-River Falls, River Falls, WI 54022, USA.
Perle E ZhitnitskiyDepartment of Veterinary Population Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7145-0960
Kurt D VogelDepartment of Animal and Food Science, University of Wisconsin-River Falls, River Falls, WI 54022, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8712-7298
University of Wisconsin–River Falls · USUniversity of Minnesota · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USIowa State University · USMichigan State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three penetrating captive bolt (PCB) placements were tested on cadaver heads from swine with estimated body weight (BW) >200 kg (sows = 232.9 ± 4.1 kg; boars = 229.3 ± 2.6 kg). The objectives were to determine tissue depth, cross-sectional brain area, visible brain damage (BD), regions of BD, and bolt-brain contact; and determine relationships between external head dimensions and tissue depth at each placement. A Jarvis PAS-Type P 0.25R PCB with a Long Stunning Rod Nosepiece Assembly and 3.5 g power loads was used at the following placements on heads from 111 sows and 46 boars after storage at 2 to 4 °C for ~62 h before treatment: FRONTAL (F)-3.5 cm superior to the optic orbits at midline, TEMPORAL (T)-at the depression posterior to the lateral canthus of the eye within the plane between the lateral canthus and the base of the ear, or BEHIND EAR (BE)-directly caudal to the pinna of the ear on the same plane as the eyes and targeting the middle of the opposite eye. For sows, the bolt path was in the plane of the brain for 42/42 (100%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.6% to 100.0%) F heads, 39/40 (97.5%, 95% CI: 86.8% to 99.9%) T heads, and 34/39 (87.5%, 95% CI: 72.6% to 95.7%) BE heads; for the heads that could reliably be assessed for BD damage was detected in 25/26 (96.2%, 95% CI: 80.4% to 99.9%) F heads, 24/35 (68.6%, 95% CI: 50.7% to 83.2%) T heads, and 5/40 (12.5%, 95% CI: 4.2% to 26.8%) BE heads. For boars, the bolt path was in the plane of the brain for 17/17 (100.0%, 95% CI: 80.5% to 100.0%) F heads, 18/18 (100.0%, 95% CI: 81.5% to 100.0%) T heads, and 14/14 (100.0%, 95% CI: 76.8% to 100.0%) BE heads; damage was detected in 11/12 (91.7%, 95% CI: 61.5% to 99.8%) F heads, 2/15 (13.3%, 95% CI: 1.7% to 40.5%) T heads, and 7/14 (50.0%, 95% CI: 23.0% to 77.0%) BE heads. Tissue depth was reported as mean ± standard error followed by 95% one-sided upper reference limit (URL). For sows, total tissue thickness was different (P < 0.05) between placements (F: 52.7 ± 1.0 mm, URL: 64.1 mm; T: 69.8 ± 1.4 mm, URL: 83.9 mm; BE: 89.3 ± 1.5 mm, URL: 103.4 mm). In boars, total tissue thickness was different (P < 0.05) between placements (F: 41.2 ± 2.1 mm, URL: 56.3 mm; T: 73.2 ± 1.5 mm, URL: 83.4 mm; BE: 90.9 ± 3.5 mm, URL: 113.5 mm). For swine > 200 kg BW, F placement may be more effective than T or BE due to less soft tissue thickness, which may reduce concussive force. The brain was within the plane of bolt travel for 100% of F heads with BD for 96.2% and 91.7% of F sow and boar heads, respectively.

Indexed as

Sus scrofaSwine DiseasesAnimalsBody WeightCadaverCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHeadMaleSwineboarcaptive bolteuthanasiasowswinewelfare

Identifiers

PMID34748623
PMCPMC8664767
OpenAlexW3214277241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.