Investigation of the use of meloxicam post farrowing for improving sow performance and reducing pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the effects of meloxicam administered to sows shortly after parturition on nursing behaviour and piglet survival and growth. Materials and methods: A total of 289 sows and their litters were used. Sows within 12 hours of farrowing were randomly allocated to receive either an intramuscular injection of meloxicam (extra-label) or a placebo. Researchers were blinded to treatment. All piglets were weighed within 12 hours of birth, at castration and tail-docking (5 to 7 days of age), and prior to weaning (19 to 21 days of age). Litters were categorized as small, medium, and large. Additional measurements involving the sow, including position changes, rectal temperatures, and feed-intake scores, were performed on a smaller number of the study sows. Results: There were no significant treatment effects on piglet mortality or growth rate. However, growth rate of pigs in medium-sized litters (11 to 13 pigs) tended to be better for sows treated with meloxicam than for sows given a placebo (P = .07). Growth rate was positively correlated with weight at birth and at weaning (P < .001) and negatively correlated with sow parity and litter size at birth (P < .001). Piglet mortality was not associated with treatment, but was associated with large litter size and light birth weight (P < .001). Implications: Meloxicam given to all sows post farrowing does not result in improved piglet survival and growth. Improved performance might be noted if only sows having difficult farrowings were treated. Further studies are required to confirm.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".