Evidence Hub

A systematic review of the potential uses of on-animal sensors to monitor the welfare of sheep evaluated using the Five Domains Model as a framework

E. Fogarty, David L. Swain, G. Cronin, M. Trotter

Animal Welfare, 2019

64 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

This systematic review explores the use of on-animal sensors in sheep and their potential application in objective welfare monitoring. The key questions posed were: To what extent can current scientific knowledge inform a sensor-based approach to welfare evaluations? And, how might

this knowledge shape development of commercial monitoring systems? These questions were explored through retrospective classification of published sensor applications using The Five Domains (FD) Model as a framework for animal welfare assessment. A total of 71 studies were reviewed. The results

indicate studies specifically evaluating the use of sensors for welfare assessment are limited, though many experiments could still be related to some aspect of welfare. The assessment of sensor utilisation revealed the greatest proportion of applications within the 'Behaviour' Domain (90.1%;

n = 64), and the lowest within the 'Health' (25.4%; n = 18) and 'Mental state' Domains (25.4%; n = 18). The review also highlights how different sensor types (location, motion or physiological) differ in their applicability for welfare assessment. This paper is the first to classify published

sensor applications using the FD Model as a framework and highlights the potential for sensor technology in sheep welfare monitoring. The results suggest that any attempt to create a commercial sensor-based system for objective welfare assessment will require the integration of more than one

sensor type, particularly if multiple…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 64 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free