Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39991202›Full record

ArticleTranslational animal science2025

Exploring industry perspectives and preferences about calf handling and restraint methods used during spring processing of calves in western Canada.

Lindsey Arkangel, Claire Windeyer, Christy Goldhawk, Cindy Adams, Ed Pajor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational animal science, 2025. 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

5 authors.

Lindsey ArkangelFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Claire WindeyerFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Christy GoldhawkFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Cindy AdamsFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Ed PajorFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4Z6, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Calf processing events have important animal health, management, and sociocultural roles in the beef cattle industry. In western Canada, the three most commonly used methods for spring processing are roping and wrestling (RW), roping and Nord fork (NF), and tilt table (TT). The objective of this study was to understand the preferences and perceptions of handling event participants about calf handling and restraint methods commonly used during western Canadian beef calf processing events during the spring season. Data were collected using a mixed-methods online questionnaire. Quantitative analysis was used to describe the study participants and determine preference rankings. Qualitative, thematic analysis was used to explore participants' perceptions about the common handling and restraint methods and to identify values within and across participants. The majority of participants were farm hands or staff members (92.8%), followed by owners (4.9%), family members (1.4%), friends (0.5%), and others (0.4%). The most preferred method to use was RW, and TT was the least preferred (χ

Indexed as

beef cattlemixed methodsperceptionsprocessingvalues

Identifiers

PMID39991202
PMCPMC11842966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.