Cargando…
Prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the UK using expert consensus
BACKGROUND: The welfare of all animals under human management is an area of consistent public concern, but strategies to improve welfare may vary across species. In this study, expert consensus, using a modified Delphi approach, was used to prioritise welfare issues of farmed and companion animals i...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7848064/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32631849 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.105964 |
_version_ | 1783645048991121408 |
---|---|
author | Rioja-Lang, Fiona Bacon, Heather Connor, Melanie Dwyer, Cathy Mary |
author_facet | Rioja-Lang, Fiona Bacon, Heather Connor, Melanie Dwyer, Cathy Mary |
author_sort | Rioja-Lang, Fiona |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The welfare of all animals under human management is an area of consistent public concern, but strategies to improve welfare may vary across species. In this study, expert consensus, using a modified Delphi approach, was used to prioritise welfare issues of farmed and companion animals in the UK. METHODS: The study involved 117 experts, divided between eight species groups. Experts were recruited from a broad range of disciplines. Two rounds of online surveys were conducted using the online survey tool, and the final round was an in-person workshop with a subsection of experts (n=21). The experts agreed that welfare issues should be ranked considering three categories: (1) severity, (2) duration and (3) perceived prevalence. RESULTS: A comprehensive list of welfare issues was generated for each species by discussion boards (cats, rabbits and horses) or by literature review (dogs, pigs, poultry, cattle and small ruminants). In the first online survey, the experts scored each welfare issue using the three categories (severity, duration and prevalence) on a 6-point Likert scale, where 1=never/none and 6=always/high. Lists of welfare issues were reduced to 25 per cent–59 per cent of the total number, by determining mean ranks from expert ratings. In round 2, experts were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the rankings. In the final stage, during the workshop, the top-ranking welfare issues for animals were determined for individual animals (considering the greatest severity and duration, in the expert’s opinion) and for perceived prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, prioritised welfare issues included lack of knowledge of welfare needs, social behaviour issues, problem behaviours, inappropriate diet and environment, lack of veterinary care, consequences from breeding decisions, poor pain management, delayed euthanasia and chronic ill health. The Delphi process resulted in consensus on the most significant welfare challenges of animals in the UK and can help to guide future research and education priority decisions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7848064 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78480642021-02-08 Prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the UK using expert consensus Rioja-Lang, Fiona Bacon, Heather Connor, Melanie Dwyer, Cathy Mary Vet Rec Original Research BACKGROUND: The welfare of all animals under human management is an area of consistent public concern, but strategies to improve welfare may vary across species. In this study, expert consensus, using a modified Delphi approach, was used to prioritise welfare issues of farmed and companion animals in the UK. METHODS: The study involved 117 experts, divided between eight species groups. Experts were recruited from a broad range of disciplines. Two rounds of online surveys were conducted using the online survey tool, and the final round was an in-person workshop with a subsection of experts (n=21). The experts agreed that welfare issues should be ranked considering three categories: (1) severity, (2) duration and (3) perceived prevalence. RESULTS: A comprehensive list of welfare issues was generated for each species by discussion boards (cats, rabbits and horses) or by literature review (dogs, pigs, poultry, cattle and small ruminants). In the first online survey, the experts scored each welfare issue using the three categories (severity, duration and prevalence) on a 6-point Likert scale, where 1=never/none and 6=always/high. Lists of welfare issues were reduced to 25 per cent–59 per cent of the total number, by determining mean ranks from expert ratings. In round 2, experts were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the rankings. In the final stage, during the workshop, the top-ranking welfare issues for animals were determined for individual animals (considering the greatest severity and duration, in the expert’s opinion) and for perceived prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, prioritised welfare issues included lack of knowledge of welfare needs, social behaviour issues, problem behaviours, inappropriate diet and environment, lack of veterinary care, consequences from breeding decisions, poor pain management, delayed euthanasia and chronic ill health. The Delphi process resulted in consensus on the most significant welfare challenges of animals in the UK and can help to guide future research and education priority decisions. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-12-19 2020-12-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7848064/ /pubmed/32631849 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.105964 Text en © British Veterinary Association 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, an indication of whether changes were made, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Rioja-Lang, Fiona Bacon, Heather Connor, Melanie Dwyer, Cathy Mary Prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the UK using expert consensus |
title | Prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the UK using expert consensus |
title_full | Prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the UK using expert consensus |
title_fullStr | Prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the UK using expert consensus |
title_full_unstemmed | Prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the UK using expert consensus |
title_short | Prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the UK using expert consensus |
title_sort | prioritisation of animal welfare issues in the uk using expert consensus |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7848064/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32631849 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.105964 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT riojalangfiona prioritisationofanimalwelfareissuesintheukusingexpertconsensus AT baconheather prioritisationofanimalwelfareissuesintheukusingexpertconsensus AT connormelanie prioritisationofanimalwelfareissuesintheukusingexpertconsensus AT dwyercathymary prioritisationofanimalwelfareissuesintheukusingexpertconsensus |