Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38998122›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Animal Welfare Guidelines for International Development Organisations in the Global South.

Paul Ssuna, Andrew Crump, Karin Siegmund

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Paul SsunaSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Resources, Animal Welfare Competence Center for Africa (AWeCCA), Makerere University, Kampala P.O. Box 7062, Uganda.
Andrew CrumpAnimal Welfare Science and Ethics, Royal Veterinary College, London NW1 0TU, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4485-5740
Karin SiegmundWelttierschutzstiftung, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

Funding

Welttierschutzstiftung (WTS) 2022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

International development organisations have improved billions of human lives in the Global South. However, in both their projects and advice to governments, most of these organisations neglect animal welfare. This blindspot matters. Poor welfare standards risk the organisation's reputation, particularly with donors; they reduce livestock lifespans and productivity, harming recipients; and they cause animals unnecessary pain and suffering. Here, we set out animal welfare guidelines for international development organisations. They were developed through extensive stakeholder engagement with organisations, donors, and recipients, especially in Africa. To comprehensively cover animal welfare, the guidelines encompass governance structure within the organisation, staff training, standard operating procedures, water, food, housing, social isolation, enrichment, drainage and waste disposal, disease, invasive procedures, transport, slaughter, breeds, record-keeping, and monitoring and evaluation of success. We urge international development organisations to adopt and institutionalise these guidelines, so they promote good animal welfare.

Indexed as

animal welfarecharitygovernmentinternational development organisationNGO

Identifiers

PMID38998122
PMCPMC11240469

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.