ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026
Broiler Farming in Africa vs. the EU: Divergent Systems, Shared Challenges, and Future Directions-A Review.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBroiler production systems in Africa and the European Union (EU) differ substantially in terms of housing design, environmental control, welfare outcomes, and regulatory oversight. Understanding these differences is essential for identifying region-appropriate strategies for sustainable poultry production.
objectivesThis review aimed to compare broiler housing systems, welfare outcomes, environmental management, and regulatory frameworks in Africa and the EU.
methodsThis review followed some aspects of the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Searches were conducted in Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and CAB Abstracts from January 2023 to January 2025. The grey literature from the FAO, EU institutions, and NGOs was also screened. Eligible studies examined broiler housing systems, welfare indicators, environmental control, or regulatory frameworks in African or EU contexts. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the SYRCLE tool. No meta-analysis was performed due to heterogeneity; results were synthesized narratively.
resultsThe search identified 86 records; 83 remained after duplicate removal. After screening, 45 studies met the inclusion criteria. EU systems were characterized by climate-controlled indoor housing, strict welfare regulations, and integrated supply chains. African systems ranged from intensive open-sided houses to semi-intensive and backyard systems, with major constraints including heat stress, limited access to veterinary care, and high feed costs. These systems also differ markedly across African regions, reflecting variation in infrastructure, market integration, and climatic conditions. Risk of bias was moderate across most studies. The certainty of the evidence was low to moderate due to heterogeneity in study designs and reporting. LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneous study designs prevented quantitative synthesis. Reporting quality varied, and few African studies provided detailed welfare metrics.
conclusionsBroiler production systems in Africa and the EU reflect distinct climatic, economic, and institutional contexts. Sustainable improvements require region-specific strategies rather than universal housing models. In this review, region-specific strategies refer to climate-adaptive housing designs, modular environmental control technologies, and management approaches aligned with local infrastructure, market structures, and resource availability.
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.