ArticleEquine veterinary journal2025
Noseband type and tightness level affect pressure on the horse's face at trot.
Article in Equine veterinary journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring the Rider-Horse Dyad Across Olympic Equestrian Disciplines: A Scoping Review of Methodological Gaps and Priorities for Show Jumping.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Reply to Henshall et al. Commentary on "MacKechnie-Guire et al. Measuring Noseband Tightness on the Lateral Aspect of the Horse's Face.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Stress Responses in Dressage Horses: Insights from FEI Noseband Measurements Across National Competition Levels.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Commentary on MacKechnie-Guire et al. Measuring Noseband Tightness on the Lateral Aspect of the Horse's Face.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Using an Equine Cadaver Head to Investigate Associations Between Sub-Noseband Space, Noseband Tension, and Sub-Noseband Pressure at Three Locations.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Facial pressure beneath a cavesson noseband adjusted to different tightness levels during standing and chewing.Equine veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Regulatory Integrity and Welfare in Horse Sport: A Constructively Critical Perspective.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Noseband type and tightness level affect pressure on the horse's face at trot.Equine veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of Rein Forces and Pressure Beneath the Noseband and Headpiece of a Snaffle Bridle and a Double Bridle.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Measuring Noseband Tightness on the Lateral Aspect of the Horse's Face.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPoor noseband adjustment could create high pressures that may risk pain or tissue damage.
objectivesTo quantify sub-noseband pressures dorsally over the nasal bone and ventrally over the mandibular rami for a Cavesson, Swedish (crank), Drop and Flash noseband at five tightness levels (2.0 to 0.0 finger equivalents). STUDY
designIn vivo experiments.
methodsEight high-level dressage horses were ridden at the trot in a straight line by their usual riders. Two small pressure mats, attached to the noseband over the nasal bone and the mandibular rami, collected force (N) and pressure (kPa) data from four noseband types (Cavesson/Swedish/Flash/Drop) each adjusted to five tightness levels (2.0/1.5/1.0/0.5/0.0 finger equivalents) based on the use of a taper gauge. Noseband tightness and types were compared using Friedman's analyses with post hoc Wilcoxon tests (p ≤ 0.01).
resultsPressures (median and [25th and 75th percentiles]) and forces increased with tightness for all noseband types with higher mean pressures consistently recorded on the mandibles (Cavesson: 9.1 [5.0, 12.5] kPa, Swedish: 10.5 [6.3, 14.9] kPa, Flash: 8.0 [3.6, 15.2] kPa) than the nasal bones (Cavesson: 2.8 [1.1, 4.7] kPa, Swedish: 4.3 [3.1, 7.4] kPa, Flash: 4.9 [3.0, 7.3] kPa, p ≤ 0.002). None of the measured nasal pressures or forces differed significantly between tightness levels of 2.0 (1.6 [0.6, 3.6] kPa) and 1.5 fingers (2.9 [1.3, 4.1] kPa), but these values significantly increased from 1.0 (3.1 [1.5, 4.9] kPa), 0.5 (4.2 [2.3, 6.2] kPa), and 0.0 finger tightness (6.4 [3.8, 10.3] kPa) for most variables (p ≤ 0.004). No differences were found in mean/maximal nasal and mandibular pressures when fitted with a Cavesson or Swedish noseband. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Behavioural and physiological parameters were not measured.
conclusionsNasal and mandibular pressures increased with noseband tightness, with 1.0 finger laxity or less associated with significantly and incrementally higher pressures than 1.5 or 2.0 finger tightness.
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.