ArticlePorcine health management2025
Co-occurrence of sudden feeding behaviour deviations and welfare issue onsets in growing-finishing pigs.
Article in Porcine health management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundModern sensor technologies and algorithms have the potential to continuously monitor indicators of individual animal welfare, but in growing-finishing pigs the validity of such welfare monitoring remains low for unclear reasons. This study explored how sudden deviations in individual pig feeding behaviour, detected as alerts by a dynamic linear model with Kalman filter, relate to the onset of welfare issues.
resultsAlerts frequencies varied across feeding behaviour components, with higher occurrences for feed intake, feeding duration, feeding rate and night intake (approximately 14.5% of days with an alert) than for feeding frequency and circadian rhythm strength (approximately 7.7% of days with an alert). Limited temporal overlap was observed between feeding components (mean co-occurrence: 18 ± 2%, range 8-47%). Alert prevalence was lower in the first month of the growing-finishing phase for all feeding components except frequency and night intake, which showed opposing patterns. Substantial inter-individual variation in alert prevalence was observed (range: 1.1 - 22.2% alert days). The co-occurrence of alerts and welfare issue onsets, i.e. the sensitivity, was poor and not better than expected by chance (health issues: 2.0 - 48.7%, heat stress: 6.4 - 23.2%). Highest sensitivities were obtained for combinations of coughing, ear tip damage, lameness, rectal prolapse, or tail damage with feed intake, feeding duration or night intake. Sensitivities dropped further when only positive (range: 0.0 - 30.8%) or negative (range: 1.0 - 33.3%) alerts were considered. Sensitivities beyond chance expectations were obtained for feed intake, feeding duration and/or night intake in lame or tail-bitten pigs with specific feeding strategies (range: 4.6 - 66.7%).
conclusionsThese results suggest that sudden deviations in feeding behaviour co-occur poorly with onsets of health issues and heat stress, and that current achievements may be largely based on statistical probabilities. However, mild sensitivities were identified for certain health issues and feeding components, especially for pigs with specific feeding strategies. In addition, the results imply that different types of deviations exist, which differ in suddenness and persistence across the welfare issues' duration. Considering the importance of individual feeding strategies and basal feeding behaviour, stimulating more consistent basal behaviour by improving pigs' housing conditions may reveal new avenues for continuous welfare monitoring.
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.