Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37048488›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

Systematic Evaluation of Different Fresh Cow Monitoring Procedures.

Felix König, Andrew Hancock, Christian Wunderlich, Marcus Klawitter, Thomas Breuer, Anne Simoni, Karina Weimar, Marc Drillich, Michael Iwersen

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Felix KönigUniversity Clinic for Ruminants, Clinical Unit for Herd Health Management in Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0872-8800
Andrew HancockZoetis International, D18 T3Y1 Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-7225-5668
Christian WunderlichZoetis Germany GmbH, 10785 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0957-9664
Marcus KlawitterZoetis Germany GmbH, 10785 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3580-0353
Thomas BreuerZoetis Germany GmbH, 10785 Berlin, Germany.
Anne SimoniUniversity Clinic for Ruminants, Clinical Unit for Herd Health Management in Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine, 1210 Vienna, Austria.
Karina WeimarUniversity Clinic for Ruminants, Clinical Unit for Herd Health Management in Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine, 1210 Vienna, Austria.
Marc DrillichUniversity Clinic for Ruminants, Clinical Unit for Herd Health Management in Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-2824-8185
Michael IwersenUniversity Clinic for Ruminants, Clinical Unit for Herd Health Management in Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-7893-6050

Funding

Austrian Research Promotion Agency 854182
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Establishing fresh cow monitoring procedures is considered beneficial for cow health, welfare, and productivity. However, they are time consuming and require the cows to be locked up, which restricts their natural behavior. In this study, different fresh cow monitoring procedures were evaluated. Two experiments were conducted to determine: (1) the duration of various examinations and treatments; (2) the time cows remain locked up in headlocks; and (3) the proportion of examination and treatment times relative to the total headlock time. In advance, standard operating procedures were established. Three veterinarians conducted the examinations and treatments based on changes in milk yield, clinical symptoms, and alarms by an accelerometer system. The headlock time was evaluated for three workflow strategies, which differed in the order of examinations and treatments. To determine the duration, cameras were installed, and the video footage was analyzed. The examinations lasted between 1 and 227 s, and the cows were locked up in headlocks between 0.01 and 1.76 h. The lock-up times differed significantly among the three strategies, as well as the proportion. This study provides information that can be used as a basis for the development of time-efficient strategies, and to minimize the impact on cows' time budgets.

Indexed as

animal managementanimal welfaredairy cowprecision livestock management

Identifiers

PMID37048488
PMCPMC10093265

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.