Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36290140›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Defining "Normal" in Pig Parturition.

Alexandra Walls, Bianca Hatze, Sabrina Lomax, Roslyn Bathgate

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. A Review of Assessment of Sow Pain During Farrowing Using Grimace Scores.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. An Investigation of Parturient Ocular Appearance in Sows.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexandra WallsSydney School of Veterinary Science, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney 2006, Australia.
Bianca HatzeSydney School of Veterinary Science, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney 2006, Australia.
Sabrina LomaxSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6417-5788
Roslyn BathgateSydney School of Veterinary Science, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7922-5610
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animal production industries rely on efficient and successful reproductive outcomes, with pigs being no exception. The process of parturition in pigs (farrowing) can be especially prolonged, due to the large numbers of piglets being born (on average, approximately 13 piglets per litter in Australian conditions). Difficulties in farrowing (dystocia) lead to poor piglet outcomes and health problems in sows, in turn, causing economic loss for producers and welfare concerns for the animals. Despite the importance of this topic and publications in the area stretching back nearly 50 years, there is still no consensus on the prevalence of dystocia in pigs nor on how to identify a pig experiencing the condition. Understanding the process of parturition and the factors that influence its success is a crucial step towards the early identification of sows undergoing dystocia and development of best practices to assist them. This article describes the key factors that contribute to successful farrowing and identifies areas in which more research is required before the parturition process in the pig can be fully understood.

Indexed as

behaviourdystociaeutociareproductionsowwelfare

Identifiers

PMID36290140
PMCPMC9597809
OpenAlexW4306149733

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.