Short communication: Calf cleanliness does not predict diarrhea upon arrival at a veal calf facility
Open accessAbstract
The objective of this study was to validate the use of cleanliness scores to identify the presence of diarrhea in calves. On arrival at a milk-fed veal facility, 452 calves were scored for hide cleanliness and fecal consistency by 1 of 2 observers. Fecal consistency was scored on a scale of 0 to 3, where fecal score of 0 = normal consistency, 1 = semiformed or pasty, 2 = loose feces, and 3 = watery feces; calves with a fecal score of 2 or 3 were classified as positive for diarrhea. Hide cleanliness was also scored on a scale of 0 to 3, where 0 = clean thighs and body with little to no manure on lower legs; 1 = tail head region and back end of calf are soiled with manure; 2 = tail head region, back end of calf, and thighs or legs are soiled with manure; and 3 = tail head region, back end of calf, thighs, and legs are soiled with manure. Of the calves scored, 188 calves (42%) were identified as having diarrhea based on hide cleanliness; however, only 78 calves (17%) were identified with diarrhea based on fecal consistency. The level of agreement between the 2 scoring methods were calculated, and a weighted kappa of 0.22 indicated only fair agreement between the 2 scoring methods. However, the sensitivity and specificity, calculated using fecal consistency ≥2 as the classification variable, were 67 and 63%, respectively, when a cut point of ≥1 for cleanliness score was used. A total of 222 calves scored at arrival were scored once per day for an additional 2 d following arrival. Calves were more likely to have more days with abnormal hide cleanliness than abnormal fecal consistency; 91 calves (41%) had an abnormal cleanliness score for at least 2 d, whereas only 21 calves (9%) had an abnormal fecal score for at least 2 d. We found poor correlation between total number of days with an abnormal cleanliness score and total number of days with an abnormal fecal score, indicating that consecutive observations of hide cleanliness would not improve the validity of using hide cleanliness. Thus, hide cleanliness is not a good indicator for identifying diarrhea in calves, and scoring fecal samples for consistency should be used to more accurately identify diarrhea in calves.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Cleanliness scores were not as useful as fecal scores in identifying calves with loose feces.
“As found by Graham et al. (2018), cleanliness scores were not as useful as fecal scores in identifying calves with loose feces.”
From Relative merits of offering a milk replacer, glucose-electrolyte, or whey-based diet on the blood composition and health of unweaned calves after transport. (2024) · cites this paper as Graham et al., 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 18 · Cited by 19
- Authors
- Graham, A. N., Renaud, D. L., Duffield, T. F., & Kelton, D. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Guelph (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Kelton, D.F.
- Venue
- Journal of Dairy Science
- Publisher
- American Dairy Science Association
- Published
- 2018-04
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 3363-3366
- ISSN
- 0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2785958699
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 1.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Dairy Farmers of Ontario
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal health and immunology
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Animal Disease Management and Epidemiology
- Keywords
- calf diarrhea, stool consistency, veal calves, diagnostic accuracy
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Cattle, Cattle Diseases, Diarrhea, Feces, Hygiene
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