Cited by 23Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesVeterinary Orthopedics and Neurology

Application of a welfare assessment tool (shelter quality protocol) in 64 Italian long-term dogs' shelters: welfare hazard analysis

Arena, L, Berteselli, GV, Lombardo, F, Candeloro, L, Villa, P Dalla, Massis, F De·2019·Animal Welfare

Abstract

The confined environment of the dog shelter, particularly over extensive time-periods can impact severely on welfare. Surveillance and assessment are therefore essential components of the welfare protocol. The aim of this study was to generate a descriptive analysis of a sample of Italian long-term shelters and identify potential hazards regarding the welfare of shelter dogs. This was achieved through application of the Shelter Quality Protocol (SQP) to link income/outcome variables and the inclusion of sixty-four long-term shelters in Italy. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were conducted. Key findings showed feeding regime, type of diet and access to outdoor area to be significantly associated with inadequate body condition score (BCS). The probability of observing skin lesions was shown to be influenced by bedding inadequacy and bedding type. Limiting beds to one per dog and utilising clean bedding materials was significantly associated with a reduced probability of observing dirty/wet dogs. Protection from adverse weather conditions and inadequate bedding were significantly associated with the manifestation of polypnea. Non-existent dog training facilities, outdoor access or leash walking were all found to significantly increase the likelihood of fearful or aggressive attitudes to people. Outdoor access also, in conjunction with feeding regime, was associated with the presence of diarrhoea. The SQP proved useful in identifying welfare hazards, both as regards…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7120/09627286.28.3.353

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Previous research in shelter dogs has demonstrated reductions in behavioral and physiological indicators of negative affect through provisions of positive human-animal interactions.

    “While research to date has not specifically explored ways to reduce excessive arousal, previous research in shelter dogs has demonstrated reductions in behavioral (e.g., vocalizations, panting) and physiological (e.g., heart rate and cortisol) indicators of negative affect through provisions of positive human-animal interactions, such as petting sessions or physical exercise (4, 27–33).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Arena, L., Berteselli, G., Lombardo, F., Candeloro, L., Villa, P. D., & Massis, F. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Teramo (IT)
  • Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell'Abruzzo e del Molise G. Caporale (IT)
Corresponding author
Arena, L
Venue
Animal Welfare
Published
2019-08
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
353-363
ISSN
  • 0962-7286 (ISSN-L)
  • 2054-1538
OpenAlex
W2995313635
Cited by
23
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
2.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Animal Welfare (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Orthopedics and Neurology
Keywords
shelter dogs, animal welfare assessment, body condition score, skin lesions, outdoor access, feeding regime, polypnea, diarrhea, shelter management

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