Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40281991›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025

Guinea Pig (

Tanja Elsbacher, Andrea Sommese, Susanne Waiblinger, Frank Künzel, Christine Arhant, Ines Windschnurer

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

6 authors.

Tanja ElsbacherCentre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, Clinical Department for Farm Animals and Food System Science, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria.
Andrea SommeseCentre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, Clinical Department for Farm Animals and Food System Science, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-8859-5018
Susanne WaiblingerCentre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, Clinical Department for Farm Animals and Food System Science, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-3565-4306
Frank KünzelClinical Unit of Internal Medicine Small Animals, Special Ambulance for Small Mammals, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria.
Christine ArhantCentre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, Clinical Department for Farm Animals and Food System Science, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-5491-1622
Ines WindschnurerCentre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, Clinical Department for Farm Animals and Food System Science, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-2816-638X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research on the welfare of pet guinea pigs and connections between their behaviour and husbandry practices is scarce. Through an online survey among 1181 German-speaking guinea pig caretakers, we investigated husbandry practices (including social composition, housing type, free roaming, enrichment, and feeding), human-animal interactions, and guinea pig behaviour. Most participating caretakers seemed attentive to their animals' needs and welfare, as shown by the prevalence of self-built enclosures (42.8%) and fenced floor areas (21.1%), with various enrichment and furnishings, and mostly balanced nutrition. Husbandry practices that can negatively impact welfare, such as individual housing and no constant access to hay, were observed for 7.5% and 0.4% of the animals, respectively. Eating and resting next to conspecifics and locomotor play occurred several times per day in 87.6%, 48.1%, and 19.9% of animals, respectively. Biting, running up and down and bar chewing were rare (several times per day in 0.4%, 2.9%, and 0.7% of animals, respectively). We found significant associations of guinea pig behaviour with human-animal interactions and housing conditions. For instance, affiliative behaviour and locomotor play and use of enrichment were more frequently reported in the case of more frequent positive human-animal interactions and food enrichment. Our results provide additional knowledge to support consultations on behaviour and husbandry practices.

Indexed as

affiliative behaviouragonistic behaviourcareenrichmentfeedingfree roaminghealthhousinghuman–animal relationshipplay behaviourrepetitive behaviour

Identifiers

PMID40281991
PMCPMC12024334

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.