ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2023
Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meat inspection of pigs slaughtered in Norwegian abattoirs: insights from variance partitioning analysis.BMC veterinary research · 2026Article
- Economic Impact and Disease Insights: Understanding Organ Condemnation in Cattle Slaughtered at Bahir Dar Abattoir.Veterinary medicine and science · 2026Article
- Risk-based prioritization of official animal welfare inspections using machine learning.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Traumatic injuries detected at slaughter in cattle: impact of production system and season on animal welfare and meat condemnation in Sweden.Acta veterinaria Scandinavica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ante- and post-mortem inspections at abattoir were originally introduced to provide assurance that animal carcasses were fit for human consumption. However, findings at meat inspection can also represent a valuable source of information for animal health and welfare surveillance. Yet, before making secondary use of meat inspection data, it is important to assess that the same post-mortem findings get registered in a consistent way among official meat inspectors across abattoirs, so that the results are as much independent as possible from the abattoir where the inspection is performed. The most frequent findings at official meat inspections of pigs and beef cattle in Sweden were evaluated by means of variance partitioning to quantify the amount of variation in the probabilities of these findings due to abattoir and farm levels. Seven years of data (2012-2018) from 19 abattoirs were included in the study. The results showed that there was a very low variation between abattoirs for presence of liver parasites and abscesses, moderately low variation for pneumonia and greatest variation for injuries and nonspecific findings (e.g.,
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.