Assessment of test-retest reliability of animal-based measures on growing pig farms

Livestock Science

Volumn 151, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 35-45

  Temple, Déborah ^a   Manteca, Xavier ^a   Dalmau, Antoni ^b   Velarde, Antonio ^b  

^a UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

^b IRTA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Animal welfare assessment; Animal based measures; Pig; Test retest reliability; Welfare Quality

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; SUIDAE;

EID: 84871521946     PISSN: 18711413     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2012.10.012     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Bartko J.J. The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychol. Rep. 1966, 19:3-11.
2. Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 327:307-310.
3. Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Statistical notes: measurement error and correlation coefficients. Br. Med. J. 1996, 313:41-42.
4. Costa-Santos C., Bernardes J., Ayres-de-Campos D., Costa A., Costa C. The limits of agreement and the intraclass correlation coefficient may be inconsistent in the interpretation of agreement. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2011, 64:264-269.
5. Courboulay V., Foubert C. Testing different methods to evaluate pig welfare on farm. Anim. Welfare 2007, 16:193-196.
6. Cameron A.C., Trivedi P.K. Regression Analysis of Count Data 1998, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
7. Dalmau A., Geverink N.A., Van Nuffel A., van Steenbergen L., Van Reenen K., Hautekiet V., Vermeulen K., Velarde A., Tuyttens F.A.M. Repeatability of lameness, fear and slipping scores to assess animal welfare upon arrival in pig slaughterhouses. Animal 2010, 4:804-809.
8. de Passillé A.M., Rushen J. Can we measure human-animal interactions in on-farm animal welfare assessment? Some unresolved issues. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005, 92:193-209.
9. de Rosa G., Tripaldi C., Napolitano F., Grasso F., Bisegna V., Bordi V. Repeatability of some animal related variables in dairy cows and buffaloes. Anim. Welfare 2003, 12:625-629.
10. de Vet H.C.W. Observer reliability and agreement. Encyclopedia of Biostatistics 1998, John Wiley and Sons, New York. P. Armitage, T. Colton (Eds.).
11. de Vet H.C.W., Terwee C.B., Knol D.L., Bouter L.M. When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2006, 59:1033-1039.
12. Dohoo I., Martin W., Stryhn H. Screening and Diagnostic Tests 2009, 91-134. Veterinary Epidemiological Research Inc., Charlottetown, Price Edward Island, Canada. I. Dohoo, W. Martin, H. Stryhn (Eds.).
13. Endres, M.I., Espejo, L.A. Tucker, C.B., 2011. Evaluation of the sample needed to accurately estimate outcome-based measurements of dairy welfare on farm. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level (WAFL). Wageningen Academic publishers, Guelph, Canada.
14. Forkman B., Keeling L. Assessment of animal welfare measures for sows, piglets and fattening pigs Welfare Quality Reports 2009, No. 10. Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
15. Gillman C.E., KilBride A.L, Ossent P., Green L.E. A cross-sectional study of the prevalence and associated risk factors for bursitis in weaner, grower and finisher pigs from 93 commercial farms in England. Prev. Vet. Med. 2008, 83:308-322.
16. Hemsworth P.H., Barnett J.L., Coleman G.J., Hansen C. A study of the relationships between the attitudinal and behavioural profiles of stockpersons and the level of fear of humans and reproductive performance of commercial pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1989, 23:301-314.
17. Hemsworth P.H., Cronin G.M. Behavioral problems. Diseases of Swine 2006, 847-859. Blackwell Publishing, Iowa. B. Straw, J.J. Zimmerman, S. D'Allaire, D. Taylor (Eds.).
18. Huynh T.T.T., Aarnink A.J.A., Gerrits W.J.J., Heetkamp M.J.H., Canh T.T., Spoolder H.A.M. Thermal behaviour of growing pigs in response to high temperature and humidity. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005, 91:1-16.
19. Keeling, L.J., 2011. Measuring up to expectations: the use of animal outcome indicators in welfare assessment. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level (WAFL). Wageningen Academic publishers, Guelph, Canada.
20. ® approach. Anim. Welfare 2009, 18:451-458.
21. Lensink B.J., Van Reenen C.G., Engel B., Rodenburg T.B., Veissier I. Repeatability and reliability of an approach test to determine calves' responsiveness to humans: 'a brief report". Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003, 83:325-330.
22. Martin P., Bateson P. Measuring Behaviour 2007, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
23. Meagher R.K Observer ratings: validity and value as a tool for animal welfare research. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2009, 119:1-14.
24. Mokkink L.B., Terwee C.B., Patrick D.L., Alonso J., Stratford P.W., Knol D.L., Bouter L.M., de Vet H.C.W. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2010, 63:737-745.
25. Mullan, S., Edwards, S.A., Butterworth, A., Whay, H.R., Main, D.C.J., 2011. Inter-observer reliability testing of pig welfare outcome measures proposed for inclusion within farm assurance schemes. Vet. J. 190, 100-109.
26. Pearce G.P. Epidemiology of enteric disease in grower-finisher pigs: a postal survey of pig producers in England. Vet. Rec. 1999, 144:338-342.
27. Phythian, C.J., Wemelsfelder, F., Michalopoulou, E., Duncan, J.S., 2011. Qualitative behaviour assessment in sheep: consistency across time and association with health indicators. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level (WAFL). Wageningen Academic publishers, Guelph, Canada.
28. Plesch G., Broerkens N., Laister S., Winckler C., Knierim U. Reliability and feasibility of selected measures concerning resting behaviour for the on-farm welfare assessment in dairy cows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2010, 126:19-26.
29. Rencher A.C. Principal component analysis. Methods of Multivariate Analysis 2002, 380-405. John Wiley and sons, New York. A.C. Rencher (Ed.).
30. Rousing T., Waiblinger S. Evaluation of on-farm methods for testing the human-animal relationship in dairy herds with cubicle loose housing systems test retest and inter-observer reliability and consistency to familiarity of test person. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2004, 85:215-231.
31. Scott K., Chennells D.J., Armstrong D., Taylor L., Gill B.P., Edwards S.A. The welfare of finishing pigs under different housing and feeding systems: liquid versus dry feeding in fully-slatted and straw-based housing. Anim. Welfare 2007, 16:53-62.
32. Taylor N.R., Main D.C.J., Mendl M., Edwards S.A. Tail-biting: a new perspective. Vet. J. 2010, 186:137-147.
33. ® protocol to assess growing pigs kept under intensive conditions in Spain. J. Vet. Behav. 2011, 6:138-149.
34. Temple D., Manteca X., Velarde A., Dalmau A. Assessment of animal welfare through behavioural parameters in Iberian pigs in intensive and extensive conditions. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011, 131:29-39.
35. Temple, D., Courboulay, V., Manteca, X., Velarde, A., Dalmau, A., 2011c. Ther welfare of pigs in five different production systems in France and Spain: assessment of behavior. In: Proceedings of the 45th Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE). Academic publishers, Indianapolis, USA, Wageningen.
36. Temple D., Courboulay V., Velarde A., Dalmau A., Manteca X. The welfare of growing pigs in five production systems in France and Spain: assessment of health. Anim. Welfare 2012, 21:257-271.
37. Temple D., Courboulay V., Velarde A., Manteca X., Dalmau A. The welfare of growing pigs in five production systems: assessment of feeding and housing. Animal 2012, 6:656-667.
38. Terwee C.B., Bot S.D.M., de Boer M.R., van der Windt D.A.W.M., Knol D.L., Dekker J., Bouter L.M., de Vet H.C.W. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2007, 60:34-42.
39. Weir J.P. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2005, 19:231-240.
40. ® Assessment Protocol for Pigs 2009, Welfare Quality® Consortium, The Netherlands. A. Dalmau, A. Velarde, K. Scott, S. Edwards, I. Veissier, L. Keeling, A. Butterworth (Eds.).
41. Wemelsfelder F., Hunter E.A., Lawrence A.B., Mendl M.T. Assessing the 'whole-animal': a free-choice-profiling approach. Anim. Behav. 2001, 62:209-220.
42. Wemelsfelder F. How animals communicate quality of life: the qualitative assessment of behaviour. Anim. Welfare 2007, 16:25-31.
43. Wemelsfelder F., Millard F. Qualitative Behaviour assessment. Assessment of Animal Welfare Measures for Sows, Piglets and Fattening 2009, 213-219. Slu Service, The Netherlands. B. Forkman, L. Keeling (Eds.).
44. Wemelsfelder F., Hunter A.E., Paul E.S., Lawrence A.B. Assessing pig body language: agreement and consistency between pig farmers, veterinarians and animal activists. J. Anim. Sci. 2012, 2011-4691.
45. Winckler C., Brinkmann J., Glatz J. Long-term consistency of selected animal-related welfare parameters in dairy farms. Anim. Welfare 2007, 16:197-199.
46. Zar J.H. Simple linear correlation. Biostatistical Analysis 1999, 377-412. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA. Zar (Ed.).