ArticleJournal of advanced veterinary and animal research2024
Design and evaluation of a mobile application for enhancing farm management and performance assessment in fattening beef cattle.
Article in Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- CowPainCheck: AI-based facial expression analysis for dairy cow welfare.Journal of animal science and technology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to develop a mobile application (app) specifically designed for enhancing farm management and performance assessment in fattening beef cattle. Materials and Methods: The development process followed a user-centered design approach, which involved focus group discussions and key informant interviews with 20 participants to design content and features. The app was developed for both mobile and web platforms. After the prototype and launch of the app, the system usability scale (SUS) and user satisfaction were assessed. Results: The assessment findings identify the specific expected functions in the app, with the farm accounting records function being the most desired feature among users, followed by production analysis, production records, and resource inventory. The mean SUS score was calculated to be 75.17, indicating a qualitative assessment of "Good." The assessment of user satisfaction indicated that the mean satisfaction score for all participants was 4.26, suggesting a high level of satisfaction and a favorable perception of the app. Conclusion: This app provides an alternative way to record farm activity, suggest feed and feeding schedules, and provide financial management tools designed explicitly for small-scale beef cattle farmers.
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.