ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023
Quality-of-Life Assessments in Zoo Animals: Not Just for the Aged and Charismatic.
Review 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 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated Activity Tracking and Space Use Monitoring of Captive Jaguars with Machine Learning.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- The Effects of Light on Vertebrate Welfare: A Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Comparing Manual and Automated Spatial Tracking of Captive Spider Monkeys Using Heatmaps.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Beyond the Camera Trap: A Systematic Review of Computing Technology Used to Monitor and Interact with (More) Varied Taxa in Zoos and Aquariums.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Zoos should aim to provide all of their animals with a good quality of life (QoL) throughout all life stages. In parallel with the evolution of QoL assessment questionnaires and tools in human and domestic animal settings, in recent times, some individual zoos and zoo industry associations have incorporated such instruments into their animal management practices. This has been conducted predominantly to inform, monitor, and document end-of-life decision-making for large, charismatic mammals. There is scope to expand the use of these tools to improve their utility, validity, reliability, and value to an animal welfare program. Assessment of QoL is a complex task given that the notion being measured is abstract and self-determined, and the design and purpose of the tools to do this require careful consideration. This review explores the QoL concept as it applies to animals, the assessment indications and methodologies relevant to a zoo setting, and the importance of considering QoL at any life stage across species. An overview of current thinking and the applications and limitations of QoL evaluation of captive wild animals is offered to promote and aid facility practice reviews and to help direct future innovations that leverage concurrent and converging advances in zoo animal welfare science.
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.