ArticleAnimal welfare (South Mimms, England)2026
Friends, forage, freedom: A cluster analysis investigating horse management styles and welfare in the UK and Ireland.
Article in Animal welfare (South Mimms, England), 2026. 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.
- Choice for the horse is paramount: Owners' experiences in facilitating friends, forage, and freedom in their management practices.Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2026Article
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
This study aims to improve the welfare and management of recreational horses by identifying how different management styles affect horse health and behaviour. We examined the management styles of recreational horse owners in the UK and Ireland, focusing on social interaction (friends), access to suitable forage (forage), and unrestricted movement (freedom). We collected 1,501 survey responses, distributed via social media, and summarised the characteristics and management choices of the respondents. Using the Divisive ANAlysis cluster package in R, three distinct management styles were identified. The largest differences between clusters were in turn-out, individual stabling, and access to forage. The Horse Centred Management Cluster (HCMC) (n = 956) were more likely to provide their horses with 24-h turn-out and access to a forage source, and interaction with two or more horses. The Combined Management Cluster (CMC) (n = 434) showed a combination of management decisions that differed from the HCMC, including horses being kept in an individual stable for longer periods and being provided with shorter turn-out periods (nine or more hours). The Owner Centred Management Cluster (OCMC) (n = 111) provided a more restrictive management style with a much reduced turn-out time (typically 0-6 h), often with no contact with other horses, and less access to a forage source (0-10 h). We explored associations between management factors (friends, forage, and freedom) and horse welfare-related outputs via owner responses to health and behaviour questions, where behaviour was considered to reflect mental state. The HCMC horses were significantly less likely to exhibit gastrointestinal issues, lameness issues, handling problems, or antisocial behaviours compared to both other groups. This study highlights how management impacts the health and behaviour of recreational horses and can contribute to the development of guidance on improved management and welfare for recreational horses.
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.