Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38133845›Full record

ArticleVeterinary research communications2024

Body condition scoring in alpacas (Vicugna pacos) and llamas (Lama glama) - a scoping review.

Matthias Gerhard Wagener, Martin Ganter, Sabine Leonhard-Marek

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary research communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Body Measurements and Body Condition Scoring in Bactrian Camels.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  3. Alpaca (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Australian Alpaca Demographics and Management: A National Survey.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Matthias Gerhard WagenerClinic for Swine, Small Ruminants, Forensic Medicine and Ambulatory Service, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover Foundation, Hannover, Germany. Matthias.gerhard.wagener@tiho-hannover.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3366-8579
Martin GanterClinic for Swine, Small Ruminants, Forensic Medicine and Ambulatory Service, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover Foundation, Hannover, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1589-0803
Sabine Leonhard-MarekLibrary, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover Foundation, Hannover, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2203-4071

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessment of the body condition score (BCS) is an important tool to check the nutritional status of an animal, and thus can provide important information in herd management, but also in the veterinary examination of individual animals. In dairy farming, BCS has been recognized as an important parameter for a long time already, but over the years body condition scoring has also become more important for other species. Especially in South American camelids (SACs: alpacas and llamas), whose dense coat can hide a poor nutritional status for a long time, regular assessment of the BCS is recommended by different authors and organizations. To date, there are several instructions for the assessment of the BCS in SACs, which, however, differ significantly in some points. For a consistent approach, a total of 35 instructions for the BCS in SACs were compared in a scoping review. The spine, especially the lumbar vertebrae as well as the ribs were identified as the two main body sites recommended for assessing the BCS. Furthermore, the area between the front and rear leg and the pelvis were mentioned frequently; however, these body sites were discussed controversially. The paralumbar fossa, shoulder, and udder were only mentioned sporadically. Among the various scales, the 1-5 scale was mentioned most frequently, with the optimal BCS being 3. Nonetheless, physiological fluctuation due to breed, age, sex, pregnancy, and lactation have to be considered. The BCS should be assessed each time the animals are handled, but at least monthly. In contrast to body weight, the BCS reflects the nutritional status of an animal even after a single examination. The review showed that much of the available information on the assessment of BCS in SACs is based on practical experience rather than scientific evidence. Indeed, some of the assumptions made there might still have to be verified or modified.

Indexed as

Camelids, New WorldAnimalsFemaleLactationPregnancyBCSClinical scoreEmaciationNutritional statusSouth American camelids

Identifiers

PMID38133845
PMCPMC10998785

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.