ArticleVeterinary sciences2026
Comparative Analysis of Abattoir-Based Measures and On-Farm Pig Welfare Indicators in Italian Fattening Heavy Pigs.
Article in Veterinary sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Animal welfare monitoring is essential in pig production. On-farm animal welfare (AW) assessments may provide a comprehensive overview but are resource-intensive. Abattoir-based assessments allow pigs from multiple farms to be inspected in a single facility. However, data on the relationship between these assessments remain limited, especially for heavy pigs (160-170 kg). This study investigates these associations in Italian heavy pig production. At the abattoir, 18,333 pig carcasses from 185 batches across 86 farms were scored for tail, skin (cranial and caudal) and ear lesions. On-farm AW assessments (management, structures and animal-based measures) were obtained from the national surveillance system (ClassyFarm). Tail lesion scores were higher in pigs with intact tails, whereas ear scores showed the opposite trend, suggesting a substitution effect between tail and ear biting. This indicates that tail docking is insufficient to fully prevent abnormal behaviours. Higher skin and ear scores were associated with suboptimal management, but tail scores were not, likely due to the multifactorial nature of tail biting. Herd size had no significant effect on welfare indicators. These results highlight the complexity of assessing AW and the importance of combining abattoir and farm data to obtain a more integrated monitoring system.
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.