Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36552478›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Thermal Imaging to Assess the Health Status in Wildlife Animals under Human Care: Limitations and Perspectives.

Daniel Mota-Rojas, Alfredo M F Pereira, Julio Martínez-Burnes, Adriana Domínguez-Oliva, Patricia Mora-Medina, Alejandro Casas-Alvarado, Jennifer Rios-Sandoval, Ana de Mira Geraldo, Dehua Wang

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 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. YOLO-WildASM: An Object Detection Algorithm for Protected Wildlife.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Closing the air gap: the use of drones for studying wildlife ecophysiology.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Daniel Mota-RojasNeurophysiology, Behavior and Animal Welfare Assessment, Department of Agricultural and Animal Production, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (UAM) Unidad Xochimilco, Mexico City 04960, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-0562-0367
Alfredo M F PereiraMediterranean Institute for Agriculture, Environment and Development (MED), Institute for Advanced Studies and Research, Universidade de Évora, 7006-554 Évora, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-9430-9399
Julio Martínez-BurnesFacultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, Victoria City 87000, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-8681-4261
Adriana Domínguez-OlivaNeurophysiology, Behavior and Animal Welfare Assessment, Department of Agricultural and Animal Production, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (UAM) Unidad Xochimilco, Mexico City 04960, Mexico.
Patricia Mora-MedinaFacultad de Estudios Superiores Cuautitlán, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Cuautitlan Izcalli 54714, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-8153-8210
Alejandro Casas-AlvaradoNeurophysiology, Behavior and Animal Welfare Assessment, Department of Agricultural and Animal Production, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (UAM) Unidad Xochimilco, Mexico City 04960, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0001-8382-8388
Jennifer Rios-SandovalNeurophysiology, Behavior and Animal Welfare Assessment, Department of Agricultural and Animal Production, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (UAM) Unidad Xochimilco, Mexico City 04960, Mexico.
Ana de Mira GeraldoMediterranean Institute for Agriculture, Environment and Development (MED), Institute for Advanced Studies and Research, Universidade de Évora, 7006-554 Évora, Portugal.
Dehua WangSchool of Life Sciences, Shandong University, Qingdao 266237, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7322-2371
Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana · MXUniversity of Évora · PTAutonomous University of Tamaulipas · MXShandong University · CNUniversidad de Cuautitlán Izcalli · MX

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Promoting animal welfare in wildlife species under human care requires the implementation of techniques for continuously monitoring their health. Infrared thermography is a non-invasive tool that uses the radiation emitted from the skin of animals to assess their thermal state. However, there are no established thermal windows in wildlife species because factors such as the thickness or color of the skin, type/length of coat, or presence of fur can influence the readings taken to obtain objective, sensitive values. Therefore, this review aims to discuss the usefulness and application of the ocular, nasal, thoracic, abdominal, and podal anatomical regions as thermal windows for evaluating zoo animals' thermal response and health status. A literature search of the Web of Science, Science Direct, and PubMed databases was performed to identify relevant studies that used IRT with wild species as a complementary diagnostic tool. Implementing IRT in zoos or conservation centers could also serve as a method for determining and monitoring optimal habitat designs to meet the needs of specific animals. In addition, we analyze the limitations of using IRT with various wildlife species under human care to understand better the differences among animals and the factors that must be considered when using infrared thermography.

Indexed as

infrared thermographypainthermal statusthermal window

Identifiers

PMID36552478
PMCPMC9774956
OpenAlexW4312140613

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.