Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37048436›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

The Combined Use of Automated Milking System and Sensor Data to Improve Detection of Mild Lameness in Dairy Cattle.

Lena Lemmens, Katharina Schodl, Birgit Fuerst-Waltl, Hermann Schwarzenbacher, Christa Egger-Danner, Kristina Linke, Marlene Suntinger, Mary Phelan, Martin Mayerhofer, Franz Steininger and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

13 authors.

Lena LemmensDepartment of Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University Clinic for Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, 1210 Vienna, Austria.
Katharina SchodlDepartment of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Institute of Livestock Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, 1180 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-9592-4040
Birgit Fuerst-WaltlDepartment of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Institute of Livestock Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, 1180 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-4336-5830
Hermann SchwarzenbacherZuchtData EDV-Dienstleistungen GmbH, 1200 Vienna, Austria.
Christa Egger-DannerZuchtData EDV-Dienstleistungen GmbH, 1200 Vienna, Austria.
Kristina LinkeZuchtData EDV-Dienstleistungen GmbH, 1200 Vienna, Austria.
Marlene SuntingerZuchtData EDV-Dienstleistungen GmbH, 1200 Vienna, Austria.
Mary PhelanMSD Animal Health, D18X5K7 Dublin, Ireland.
Martin MayerhoferZuchtData EDV-Dienstleistungen GmbH, 1200 Vienna, Austria.
Franz SteiningerZuchtData EDV-Dienstleistungen GmbH, 1200 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-3400-3501
Franz PapstInstitute of Technical Informatics, Graz University of Technology, 8010 Graz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-8559-5928
Lorenz MaurerDepartment of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Institute of Livestock Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, 1180 Vienna, Austria.
Johann KoflerDepartment of Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University Clinic for Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-9664-3446

Funding

Austrian Research Promotion Agency 872039
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to develop a tool to detect mildly lame cows by combining already existing data from sensors, AMSs, and routinely recorded animal and farm data. For this purpose, ten dairy farms were visited every 30-42 days from January 2020 to May 2021. Locomotion scores (LCS, from one for nonlame to five for severely lame) and body condition scores (BCS) were assessed at each visit, resulting in a total of 594 recorded animals. A questionnaire about farm management and husbandry was completed for the inclusion of potential risk factors. A lameness incidence risk (LCS ≥ 2) was calculated and varied widely between farms with a range from 27.07 to 65.52%. Moreover, the impact of lameness on the derived sensor parameters was inspected and showed no significant impact of lameness on total rumination time. Behavioral patterns for eating, low activity, and medium activity differed significantly in lame cows compared to nonlame cows. Finally, random forest models for lameness detection were fit by including different combinations of influencing variables. The results of these models were compared according to accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. The best performing model achieved an accuracy of 0.75 with a sensitivity of 0.72 and specificity of 0.78. These approaches with routinely available data and sensor data can deliver promising results for early lameness detection in dairy cattle. While experimental automated lameness detection systems have achieved improved predictive results, the benefit of this presented approach is that it uses results from existing, routinely recorded, and therefore widely available data.

Indexed as

automated milking systemautomated monitoring sensorsclaw-position scoredairy cattleearly detection of lamenesslamenesslocomotion score

Identifiers

PMID37048436
PMCPMC10093521

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.