Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39943177›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025

Blood Sampling in Göttingen Minipigs-A Case Study of Two Standard Methods and Clicker Training as a Restraint-Free Alternative.

Kathrine Schiøler, Mikkel Lykke Jensen, Dorte Bratbo Sørensen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Kathrine SchiølerDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Gronnegaardsvej 15, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark.
Mikkel Lykke JensenScantox A/S, Hestehavevej 36A, 4623 Lille Skensved, Denmark.ORCID 0009-0005-0025-1445
Dorte Bratbo SørensenDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Gronnegaardsvej 15, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6144-1710

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood sampling often requires restraint that negatively affects animal welfare. This case study evaluated three methods for jugular vein blood sampling (V-bench, sling, and clicker training) with the overall aim of assessing the negative impact on animal welfare and providing a general recommendation on the use of methods. First, the effects of simulated blood sampling in V-bench and sling on behaviour, heart rate, and saliva cortisol concentrations 15 min after sampling were assessed. The sling (which had the least negative effects) was re-evaluated after one week of habituation to assess a possible positive effect. Clicker training was evaluated using behavioural observations only. The heart rate was significantly higher in animals placed in the V-bench compared to the sling (

Indexed as

animal welfareblood samplingclicker traininglaboratory minipigssaliva sampling

Identifiers

PMID39943177
PMCPMC11816219

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.