Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36062853›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2022

Improving sow welfare and outcomes in the farrowing house by identifying early indicators from pre-farrowing assessment.

Laura Vargovic, Rebecca Z Athorn, Susanne Hermesch, Kim L Bunter

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Using data as a clinical tool.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2023
    Article
  6. Lactation in swine: review article.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2023
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Laura VargovicAGBU, A Joint Venture of NSW Department of Primary Industries and University of New England, 2351 Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8963-1287
Rebecca Z AthornAustralian Pork Limited, Barton Australian Capital Territory 2600, Kingston Australian Capital Territory 2604, Australia.
Susanne HermeschAGBU, A Joint Venture of NSW Department of Primary Industries and University of New England, 2351 Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9647-5988
Kim L BunterAGBU, A Joint Venture of NSW Department of Primary Industries and University of New England, 2351 Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.
University of New England · AUAustralian Pork (Australia) · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Poor outcomes reflect low performance during the farrowing and lactation periods and unanticipated sow removals. Since the period around farrowing has the highest risk for sow health issues, monitoring of sows in that time-period will improve both welfare and productivity. The aim of this study was to identify the most relevant risk factors for predicting poor outcomes and the implication for sow welfare. Identifying these factors could potentially enable management interventions to decrease incidences of compromised welfare or poor performance. Data from 1,103 sows sourced from two nucleus herds were recorded for a range of variables investigated as potential predictors of poor outcomes in the farrowing house. Poor outcomes (scored as binary traits) reflected three categories in a sow's lifecycle: farrowing, lactation, and removals. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify predictors in the first instance. Predictors from univariate analyses were subsequently considered together in multi-variate models. The least square means representing predicted probabilities of poor outcomes were then reported on the observed scale. Several predictors were significant across two different environments (farms) and for all three categories. These predictors included feed refusal (lack of appetite), crate fit, locomotion score, and respiration rate. Normal appetite compared to feed refusals reduced the risk of farrowing failure (13.5 vs. 22.2%, P = 0.025) and removals (10.4 vs. 20.4%, P < 0.001). Fit in the crate was significant (P < 0.001) for farrowing and lactation outcomes, and was more informative than parity. Sows with sufficient space had two to three times reduced risk of poor outcomes compared to restrictive crates relative to sow dimensions. Sows with good locomotion score pre-farrowing had two to three times less risk of farrowing failure (P = 0.025) and reduced piglet mortality (P < 0.001), weaned two piglets more relative to affected sows (P < 0.001), and were less likely to be removed before weaning (3.24 vs. 12.3%, P = 0.014). Sows with higher respiration rates had a significantly (P < 0.001) reduced risk of poor farrowing outcomes. This study demonstrated it is possible to predict poor outcomes for sows prior to farrowing, suggesting there are opportunities to decrease the risk of poor outcomes and increase overall sow welfare.

Indexed as

Animal WelfareHousing, AnimalAnimalsFemaleLactationModels, BiologicalParityParturitionPregnancySwineWeaningfarrowinggestationmaternal performancesowsstillbirthswell-being

Identifiers

PMID36062853
PMCPMC9667975
OpenAlexW4294610426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.