Cited by 83Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaAnimal testing and alternatives

Applying ethological and health indicators to practical animal welfare assessment: -EN- Applying ethological and health indicators to practical animal welfare assessment -FR- L’utilisation d’indicateurs éthologiques et sanitaires pour l’évaluation concrète du bien-être animal -ES- Aplicación de indicadores etológicos y sanitarios a la evaluación práctica del bienestar animal

WEMELSFELDER, F., MULLAN, S.·2014·Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'OIE

Abstract

There is a growing effort worldwide to develop objective indicators for animal welfare assessment, which provide information on an animal's quality of life, are scientifically trustworthy, and can readily be used in practice by professionals. Animals are sentient beings capable of positive and negative emotion, and so these indicators should be sensitive not only to their physical health, but also to their experience of the conditions in which they live. This paper provides an outline of ethological research aimed at developing practical welfare assessment protocols. The first section focuses on the development and validation of welfare indicators generally, in terms of their relevance to animal well-being, their interobserver reliability, and the confidence with which the prevalence of described features can be estimated. Challenges in this work include accounting for the ways in which welfare measures may fluctuate over time, and identifying measures suited to monitoring positive welfare states. The second section focuses more specifically on qualitative welfare indicators, which assess the 'whole animal' and describe the expressive qualities of its demeanour (e.g. anxious, content). Such indicators must be validated in the same way as other health and behaviour indicators, with the added challenge of finding appropriate methods of measurement. The potential contribution of qualitative indicators, however, is to disclose an emotional richness in animals that helps to interpret information provided by other indicators, thus enhancing the validity of welfare assessment protocols. In conclusion, the paper emphasises the importance of integrating such different perspectives, showing that new knowledge of animals and new ways of relating to animals are both needed for the successful development of practical welfare assessment tools.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.20506/rst.33.1.2259

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 79 · Cited by 83

Authors
WEMELSFELDER, F., & MULLAN, S.
Affiliations
Roslin Institute (GB)
Venue
Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'OIE
Published
2014-04-01
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
111-120
ISSN
0253-1933 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2129115254
Cited by
83
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
7.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scientific and Technical Review (World Organisation for Animal Health) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • WBI Studies Repository (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
Keywords
animal welfare assessment, welfare indicators, ethology, inter-rater reliability, indicator validation, animal behavior, animal sentience, animal emotions, welfare assessment protocol
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Husbandry, Animal Welfare, Behavior, Animal, Emotions, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review