↓ Skip to main content

Estimating the scale of adverse animal welfare consequences of movement restriction and mitigation strategies in a classical swine fever outbreak

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Estimating the scale of adverse animal welfare consequences of movement restriction and mitigation strategies in a classical swine fever outbreak
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12917-017-1008-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shankar Yadav, Hsin-Yi Weng

Abstract

The study aim was to quantify the impact of movement restriction on the well-being of pigs and the associated mitigation responses during a classical swine fever (CSF) outbreak. We developed a stochastic risk assessment model and incorporated Indiana swine industry statistics to estimate the timing and number of swine premises that would encounter overcrowding or feed interruption resulting from movement restriction. Our model also quantified the amount of on-farm euthanasia and movement of pigs to slaughter plants required to alleviate those conditions. We simulated various single-site (i.e., an outbreak initiated from one location) and multiple-site (i.e., an outbreak initiated from more than one location) outbreak scenarios in Indiana to estimate outputs. The study estimated that 14% of the swine premises in Indiana would encounter overcrowding or feed interruption due to movement restriction implemented during a CSF outbreak. The number of premises that would experience animal welfare conditions was about 2.5 fold of the number of infected premises. On-farm euthanasia needed to be performed on 33% of those swine premises to alleviate adverse animal welfare conditions, and more than 90% of on-farm euthanasia had to be carried out within 2 weeks after the implementation of movement restriction. Conversely, movement of pigs to slaughter plants could alleviate 67% of adverse animal welfare conditions due to movement restriction, and only less than 1% of movement of pigs to slaughter plants had to be initiated in the first 2 weeks of movement restrictions. The risk of secondary outbreaks due to movement of pigs from movement restriction areas to slaughter plants was low and only seven pigs from each shipment needed to be tested for CSF infection to prevent a secondary outbreak. We found that the scale of adverse animal welfare consequences of movement restriction during a CSF outbreak in Indiana was substantial, and controlled movement of pigs to slaughter plants was an efficient and low-risk alternative mitigation response to on-farm euthanasia. The output estimates generated from this study provide empirical evidence for decision makers to properly incorporate required resources for mitigating adverse animal welfare conditions in CSF outbreak management strategic planning.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 44%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 56%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2017.
All research outputs
#4,924,128
of 9,716,694 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#555
of 1,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,264
of 261,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#38
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,716,694 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,493 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 261,794 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.