ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Detection of Chewing Strokes from Jaw Movement Signals in Dairy Cows Using a Nose-Mounted Accelerometer.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated a non-invasive nose-mounted accelerometer for automated detection of chewing strokes in dairy cows. Data were collected from 15 Holstein Friesians and validated against manual video annotations. Chewing strokes were identified using a peak detection algorithm applied to smoothed acceleration data. Two algorithm versions were analyzed: a raw version and a cleaned version that excluded a five-second interval during regurgitation, where no physiological chewing occurs. The cleaned version showed higher agreement with the reference method (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC] = 0.91; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.77-0.96) and lower error metrics (Mean Absolute Error [MAE]: 3.67; Root Mean Square Error [RMSE]: 4.72; Mean Absolute Percentage Error [MAPE]: 5.64%) compared to the raw version (ICC = 0.67; MAE: 10.00; RMSE: 11.48; MAPE: 15.27%). Both methods demonstrated that reliable detection of chewing activity is feasible using this sensor system. Automated chewing stroke detection may contribute to the assessment of rumen function, feeding behaviour, and animal welfare and may support future precision livestock farming applications by providing objective information on chewing activity.
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.