Associations between Feeding Behaviors Collected from an Automated Milk Feeder and Neonatal Calf Diarrhea in Group Housed Dairy Calves: A Case-Control Study

The objective of this case-control study was to determine if feeding behavior data collected from an automated milk feeder (AMF) could be used to predict neonatal calf diarrhea (NCD) in the days surrounding diagnosis in pre-weaned group housed dairy calves. Data were collected from two research farms in Ontario between 2017 and 2020 where calves fed using an AMF were health scored daily and feeding behavior data (milk intake (mL/d), drinking speed (mL/min), number of rewarded or unrewarded visits) was collected. Calves with NCD were pair matched to healthy controls (31 pairs) by farm, gender, and age at case diagnosis to assess for differences in feeding behavior between case and control calves. Calves were first diagnosed with NCD on day 0, and a NCD case was defined as calves with a fecal score of ≥2 for 2 consecutive days, where control calves remained healthy. Repeated measure mixed linear regression models were used to determine if there were differences between case and control calves in their daily AMF feeding behavior data in the days surrounding diagnosis of NCD (−3 to +5 days). Calves with NCD consumed less milk on day 0, day 1, day 3, day 4 and day 5 following diagnosis compared to control calves. Calves with NCD also had fewer rewarded visits to the AMF on day −1, and day 0 compared to control calves. However, while there was a NCD status x day interaction for unrewarded visits, there was only a tendency for differences between NCD and control calves on day 0. In this study, feeding behaviors were not clinically useful to make diagnosis of NCD due to insufficient diagnostic ability. However, feeding behaviors are a useful screening tool for producers to identify calves requiring further attention

Conventional laboratory housing increases morbidity and mortality in research rodents: results of a meta-analysis

Background Over 120 million mice and rats are used annually in research, conventionally housed in shoebox-sized cages that restrict natural behaviours (e.g. nesting and burrowing). This can reduce physical fitness, impair thermoregulation and reduce welfare (e.g. inducing abnormal stereotypic behaviours). In humans, chronic stress has biological costs, increasing disease risks and potentially shortening life. Using a pre-registered protocol ( https://atrium.lib.uoguelph.ca/xmlui/handle/10214/17955 ), this meta-analysis therefore tested the hypothesis that, compared to rodents in ‘enriched’ housing that better meets their needs, conventional housing increases stress-related morbidity and all-cause mortality. Results Comprehensive searches (via Ovid, CABI, Web of Science, Proquest and SCOPUS on May 24 2020) yielded 10,094 publications. Screening for inclusion criteria (published in English, using mice or rats and providing ‘enrichments’ in long-term housing) yielded 214 studies (within 165 articles, using 6495 animals: 59.1% mice; 68.2% male; 31.8% isolation-housed), and data on all-cause mortality plus five experimentally induced stress-sensitive diseases: anxiety, cancer, cardiovascular disease, depression and stroke. The Systematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) tool assessed individual studies’ risks of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses supported the hypothesis: conventional housing significantly exacerbated disease severity with medium to large effect sizes: cancer (SMD = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.54–0.88); cardiovascular disease (SMD = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.35–1.09); stroke (SMD = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.59–1.15); signs of anxiety (SMD = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.56–1.25); signs of depression (SMD = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.98–1.49). It also increased mortality rates (hazard ratio = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.25–1.74; relative median survival = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.89–0.94). Meta-regressions indicated that such housing effects were ubiquitous across species and sexes, but could not identify the most impactful improvements to conventional housing. Data variability (assessed via coefficient of variation) was also not increased by ‘enriched’ housing. Conclusions Conventional housing appears sufficiently distressing to compromise rodent health, raising ethical concerns. Results also add to previous work to show that research rodents are typically CRAMPED (cold, rotund, abnormal, male-biased, poorly surviving, enclosed and distressed), raising questions about the validity and generalisability of the data they generate. This research was funded by NSERC, Canada.Applied Science, Faculty ofMedicine, Faculty ofBiomedical Engineering, School ofReviewedFacult

How to Conduct a Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Network meta-analysis is a general approach to integrate the results of multiple studies in which multiple treatments are compared, often in a pairwise manner. In this tutorial, we illustrate the procedures for conducting a network meta-analysis for binary outcomes data in the Bayesian framework using example data. Our goal is to describe the workflow of such an analysis and to explain how to generate informative results such as ranking plots and treatment risk posterior distribution plots. The R code used to conduct a network meta-analysis in the Bayesian setting is provided at GitHub.This article is published as Hu, Dapeng, Annette M. O'Connor, Chong Wang, Jan M. Sargeant, and Charlotte B. Winder. "How to Conduct a Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis." Frontiers in Veterinary Science 7 (2020): 271. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00271. Copyright 2020 Hu, O’Connor, Wang, Sargeant and Winder. Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Posted with permission

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Depression among Farming Populations Worldwide

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to determine the overall prevalence of depression among farming populations globally, and explore any heterogeneity present. Eligible studies were primary research articles published in English, which involved the collection of data for the purpose of determining the prevalence of depression among a farming population. Four relevant databases were searched in January 2019. Potential for bias was assessed using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tool. From 7662 records, 72 articles were deemed relevant and had data extracted. Of these, 45 utilized the Center for Epidemiologic Studies—Depression Revised scale (CES-D/DR) to quantify depression, 42 of which were conducted in the United States (U.S.). As a result, meta-analyses were restricted to this geographic location. Substantial heterogeneity was seen in the initial whole-group analysis (I2 = 97%), and while sub-group exploration suggested a significantly higher prevalence of depression among migrant farm workers (26%, 95% CI = 21–31%) than in studies examining a non-migrant farming population (12%, 95% CI = 8–17%), substantial heterogeneity remained (I2 = 96%), indicating that the majority of between study variation was due to factors other than sampling error. Additionally, the majority of studies (81%) in migrant farm worker populations were published since 2010, while only 21% of studies in non-migrant farming populations were published in this timeframe. It is possible with recent efforts to de-stigmatize mental illness, participants in more recent studies may be more likely to self-report depressive symptoms. Hence, while it appears that migrant farmworker populations may have an elevated prevalence of depression, it is also apparent that little research in the U.S. has been done to evaluate depression among non-migrant farming populations in recent years. Perhaps a reporting bias may account for some of the difference between the two populations. A research gap also appears to exist in estimating the prevalence of depression among farming populations outside of the US. Assessment for bias at the study level revealed challenges in reporting of key study design elements, as well as potential for selection bias in the majority of studies

“An Incredible Amount of Stress before You Even Put a Shovel in the Ground”: A Mixed Methods Analysis of Farming Stressors in Canada

Farming is widely regarded as a highly stressful occupation, and many farming stressors have been studied globally. Research on farming stressors in Canada is scarce, yet there is some indication that Canadian farmers have high perceived stress scores and score more severely across mental health outcomes compared to the general population. This study provides a comprehensive exploration of farming stressors in Canada with the aim to inform avenues to reduce stress and/or boost the well-being of farmers. An exploratory sequential mixed-methods design was used. First, qualitative data were collected from 75 in-depth interviews with farmers and industry professionals from Ontario, Canada from 2017 to 2018. These data were then used to inform items measuring self-reported stress across 12 farming stressors in a national cross-sectional survey of farmers’ mental health conducted February–May 2021. Results from both data sources provide an initial understanding of the episodic and chronic stressors faced by farmers in Canada, and the context within which these stressors are experienced. Implications and focus areas for stress reduction and well-being promotion are discussed in this paper

Ontario Dairy Producers’ Perceived Barriers and Motivations to the Use of Pain Control for Disbudding and Dehorning Calves: A Qualitative Study

Canadian dairy farmers are required to use a local anesthetic and analgesic prior to all disbudding and dehorning procedures. This study was done to investigate the opinions of Ontario dairy farmers on the use of pain control for disbudding and dehorning calves and their perspectives on the current requirements of the quality assurance program. Interviews were conducted with 29 dairy farmers across Ontario. All participants used a cautery iron to disbud or dehorn their calves and some form of pain control (i.e., NSAID and/or local anesthetic). Of the 29 producers that were interviewed, 22 (76%) were in compliance with the proAction requirements for pain control. Many participants felt positive about the use of pain control for these practices. Education from veterinarians was one of the most commonly listed resources to reduce barriers to pain control use by producers. A farmer’s attitude was highly referenced as an influence on producer behaviour. Although participants had positive views of pain control use, full compliance with national quality assurance requirements for disbudding and dehorning was not met by all. Producer education through veterinarians is a potential avenue to encourage the adoption of pain control use for disbudding and dehorning practices

Ontario Dairy Producers’ Perceived Barriers and Motivations to the Use of Pain Control for Disbudding and Dehorning Calves: A Qualitative Study

Canadian dairy farmers are required to use a local anesthetic and analgesic prior to all disbudding and dehorning procedures. This study was done to investigate the opinions of Ontario dairy farmers on the use of pain control for disbudding and dehorning calves and their perspectives on the current requirements of the quality assurance program. Interviews were conducted with 29 dairy farmers across Ontario. All participants used a cautery iron to disbud or dehorn their calves and some form of pain control (i.e., NSAID and/or local anesthetic). Of the 29 producers that were interviewed, 22 (76%) were in compliance with the proAction requirements for pain control. Many participants felt positive about the use of pain control for these practices. Education from veterinarians was one of the most commonly listed resources to reduce barriers to pain control use by producers. A farmer’s attitude was highly referenced as an influence on producer behaviour. Although participants had positive views of pain control use, full compliance with national quality assurance requirements for disbudding and dehorning was not met by all. Producer education through veterinarians is a potential avenue to encourage the adoption of pain control use for disbudding and dehorning practices

Describing and Characterizing the Literature Regarding Umbilical Health in Intensively Raised Cattle: A Scoping Review

The objective of this scoping review was to describe and characterize the existing literature regarding umbilical health and identify gaps in knowledge. Six databases were searched for studies examining umbilical health in an intensively raised cattle population. There were 4249 articles initially identified; from these, 723 full text articles were then screened, with 150 articles included in the review. Studies were conducted in the USA (n = 41), Brazil (n = 24), Canada (n = 13), UK (n = 10), and 37 additional countries. Seventeen were classified as descriptive, 24 were clinical trials, and 109 were analytical observational studies. Umbilical outcomes evaluated in descriptive studies were infection (n = 11), parasitic infection (n = 5), and hernias (n = 2). Of the clinical trials, only one examined treatment of navel infections; the remainder evaluated preventative management factors for navel health outcomes (including infections (n = 17), myiasis (n = 3), measurements (n = 5), hernias (n = 1), and edema (n = 1)). Analytical observational studies examined risk factors for umbilical health (n = 60) and umbilical health as a risk factor (n = 60). Studies examining risk factors for umbilical health included navel health outcomes of infections (n = 28; 11 of which were not further defined), hernias (n = 8), scoring the navel sheath/flap size (n = 16), myiasis (n = 2), and measurements (n = 6). Studies examining umbilical health as a risk factor defined these risk factors as infection (n = 39; of which 13 were not further defined), hernias (n = 8; of which 4 were not further defined), navel dipping (n = 12), navel/sheath scores as part of conformation classification for breeding (n = 2), measurements (n = 3), and umbilical cord drying times (n = 2). This review highlights the areas in need of future umbilical health research such as clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of different treatments for umbilical infection. It also emphasizes the importance for future studies to clearly define umbilical health outcomes of interest, and consider standardization of these measures, including time at risk