MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605763880 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2017.00051

Development of a Piglet Grimace Scale to Evaluate Piglet Pain Using Facial Expressions Following Castration and Tail Docking: A Pilot Study

2017· article· en· W2605763880 on OpenAlexafffund
Abbie V. Viscardi, Michelle Hunniford, Penny Lawlis, Matthew C. Leach, Patricia V. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Food and AgricultureOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsCastrationAcute painMedicinePsychologyAnesthesiaEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Facial expressions are increasingly being used to assess pain in non-human species, including rodents, horses and lambs. The development of these species-specific grimace scales have allowed for more rapid pain detection, which can lead to better animal welfare if intervention promptly occurs. For grimace scales to ever be used as a stand-alone measure of pain, it is important they correlate with established pain assessment tools, such as behavioral analysis. This preliminary study aimed to determine whether piglets exhibit pain grimacing and if these facial expressions correlate with their behavior. It also assessed and compared the behavior of boar piglets given an analgesic and topical anesthetic prior to surgical castration and tail docking to piglets that did not receive anything for pain relief. Five-day-old male Yorkshire piglets (n = 19) from four pens were randomly assigned, within their pen, to one of five possible treatments: meloxicam (0.4mg/kg, intramuscularly) + EMLA® cream, meloxicam (0.4mg/kg, intramuscularly) + non-medicated cream, saline (intramuscularly) + EMLA® cream, saline (intramuscularly) + non-medicated cream or no treatment prior to surgical castration and tail docking. Piglet behaviors were video recorded for 8h immediately after castration, as well as for 1h at 24 hours pre- and post-castration. Their individual behaviors were scored continuously for the first 15mins of every hour of video collected. Facial images were also captured across all time points. A Piglet Grimace Scale (PGS) was developed and used by two observers blinded to treatment, time and procedure to score over 600 piglet faces. All piglets displayed significant behavioral changes up to 7h post-castration when compared to baseline, and the use of meloxicam and EMLA® cream was not associated with a reduction in painful behaviors. Significantly higher PGS scores were noted at 0, 3, 4, and 5h post-castration when compared to PGS scores at 7h and there was no effect of treatment. PGS scores significantly correlated with piglet behavioral activity. The results suggest that the Piglet Grimace Scale may have utility for pain evaluation in neonatal pigs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.167
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations145
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Veterinary ScienceSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207