ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2025
From tradition to precision: leveraging digital tools to improve cattle health and welfare.
Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Design Considerations, Field Validation and Perspectives of a Low-Power Wearable Sensor Collar for Continuous Monitoring of Ruminants.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in Vision-Based Beef Cattle Body Measurement Technologies.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Multivariate hematological and biochemical profiling reveals conserved physiological modules in Brahman- and Charolais-crossbred beef cattle under tropical smallholder systems.Veterinary world · 2026Article
- Big data and artificial intelligence in animal nutrition: a new era of precision feeding.Tropical animal health and production · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-driven solutions for mitigating human-wildlife conflict in biodiversity hotspots.Science progressReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional cattle production practices relied heavily on manual observation and empirical decision-making, often leading to inconsistent outcomes. In contrast, modern approaches leverage technology to achieve greater precision and efficiency. Advancement in technology has shifted to a new dimension of predictive and monitoring in cattle health management. This review aims at highlighting the available and current digital technologies in cattle health, evaluate their utility in practice, and identify possible future advancements in the field that can potentially bring even more changes to this industry. The paper highlights some of the barriers and disadvantages of using these technologies, such as data security issues, high capital investments, and skills gap. The integration of these advanced technologies is set to play a fundamental role in enabling the livestock industry to meet the rising global demand for high-quality, sustainably produced products. These technologies are essential for ensuring compliance with ethical standards and best practices in cattle care and well-being. In light of these advancements, the application of digital innovations will support the achievement of socially responsible cattle production, while simultaneously maintaining optimal levels of animal health and welfare.
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.