ArticleJournal of animal science2022
Improving sow welfare and outcomes in the farrowing house by identifying early indicators from pre-farrowing assessment.
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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-invasive measurement of blood pressure and its possible use in future in-depth studies on farrowing-related complications.Porcine health management · 2026Article
- Soybean oil and leucine in late gestation and lactation improve maternal and offspring lipid metabolism and insulin sensitivity: insights from pig model.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Monitoring Pig Structural Soundness and Body Weight in Pork Production Systems Using Computer Vision Approaches.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Towards automatic farrowing monitoring-A Noisy Student approach for improving detection performance of newborn piglets.PloS one · 2024Article
- Using data as a clinical tool.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2023Article
- Lactation in swine: review article.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.