Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39123700›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Influences on the Decision to Euthanize a Compromised Pig.

Julia Stoffregen, Tristan Winkelmann, Bettina Schneider, Michel Fehrmann, Kathrin Gerdes, Moana Miller, Jennifer Reinmold, Isabel Hennig-Pauka, Nicole Kemper, Christin Kleinsorgen and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. "Well, I think it's time………" training on making good end-of-life decisions.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2025
    Article
  4. 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

14 authors.

Julia StoffregenInstitute of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing (IBEI), WHO-CC for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Bünteweg 2, 30559 Hannover, Germany.
Tristan WinkelmannInstitute of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing (IBEI), WHO-CC for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Bünteweg 2, 30559 Hannover, Germany.
Bettina SchneiderInstitute of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing (IBEI), WHO-CC for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Bünteweg 2, 30559 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7305-6932
Michel FehrmannInstitute of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing (IBEI), WHO-CC for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Bünteweg 2, 30559 Hannover, Germany.
Kathrin GerdesField Station for Epidemiology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Büscheler Str. 9, 49456 Bakum, Germany.
Moana MillerInstitute for Animal Hygiene, Animal Welfare and Farm Animal Behavior, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Bischofsholer Damm 15, 30173 Hannover, Germany.
Jennifer ReinmoldField Station for Epidemiology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Büscheler Str. 9, 49456 Bakum, Germany.
Isabel Hennig-PaukaField Station for Epidemiology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Büscheler Str. 9, 49456 Bakum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3994-5979
Nicole KemperInstitute for Animal Hygiene, Animal Welfare and Farm Animal Behavior, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Bischofsholer Damm 15, 30173 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0092-4302
Christin KleinsorgenCentre for E-Learning, Didactics, Educational Research [ZELDA], University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Bünteweg 2, 30559 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1086-1691
Karl-Heinz TölleISN-Projekt GmbH, Kirchplatz 2, 49401 Damme, Germany.
Lothar KreienbrockInstitute of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing (IBEI), WHO-CC for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Bünteweg 2, 30559 Hannover, Germany.
Michael WendtClinic for Swine, Small Ruminants, Forensic Medicine and Ambulatory Service, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Bischofsholer Damm 15, 30173 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3545-0859
Elisabeth Grosse BeilageField Station for Epidemiology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Hannover, Büscheler Str. 9, 49456 Bakum, Germany.

Funding

This work is financially funded by the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) based on a decision of the Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany, granted by the Federal Office for Agriculture and Food (BLE; grant number 28N-2-008-01 28N-2-008-01 "CARE-PIG"
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The decision to euthanize a compromised pig can be challenging for pig farmers and veterinarians. To understand more about the challenges in Germany, a cross-sectional online survey was conducted. Based on a hybrid design, the responses of 39 veterinarians and 62 pig farmers were analyzed to generate a list of common clinical signs associated with the euthanasia of sows, fatteners, and piglets. Moreover, a set of influences on the farm, due to economic and personal considerations, were found to shape the decision-making process. The two most salient reasons outlined for the delay of timely euthanasia were uncertainty and misinterpretation of the chance for healing. The lack of valid clinical signs or a sound justification was most frequently mentioned as a challenge to the general decision-making process. In summation, this study highlights the need to generate a valid taxonomy for clinical signs that includes their development in a compromised pig over time. Future studies should elaborate on the justification of euthanasia decisions to facilitate the resolution of ethical dilemmas among the involved pig farmers and veterinarians. Lastly, the results suggest that clinical reasoning and consultation skills should be included when decision-making behavior is to be trained.

Indexed as

attitudeschallengesclinical reasoningclinical signsdecision-makingjustificationpigstimely euthanasia

Identifiers

PMID39123700
PMCPMC11311057

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.