Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42738583›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Integrated Welfare Monitoring in Laying Hens: A Systematic Literature Review, Expert Insights and a Camera Proof-of-Concept.

Sam Willems, Amélie Canon, Hanne Coppens, Niels Demaître, Nathalie Sleeckx, Tomas Norton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sam WillemsM3-BIORES Group, Division Animal and Human Health Engineering, Department of Biosystems, Catholic University of Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 30, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0326-539X
Amélie CanonM3-BIORES Group, Division Animal and Human Health Engineering, Department of Biosystems, Catholic University of Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 30, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium.ORCID 0009-0007-8399-3878
Hanne CoppensM3-BIORES Group, Division Animal and Human Health Engineering, Department of Biosystems, Catholic University of Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 30, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium.
Niels DemaîtreExperimental Poultry Centre of Province of Antwerp, Poiel 77, 2440 Geel, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-5950-4842
Nathalie SleeckxExperimental Poultry Centre of Province of Antwerp, Poiel 77, 2440 Geel, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0806-1775
Tomas NortonM3-BIORES Group, Division Animal and Human Health Engineering, Department of Biosystems, Catholic University of Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 30, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-0161-3189

Funding

Interreg North-West Europe NWE 0200174
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective welfare monitoring in laying hens is increasingly challenged by growing flock sizes, declining farm numbers, and the practical limitations of assessor-based protocols under commercial conditions. Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) technologies offer opportunities to support large-scale welfare assessment, yet their application in laying hens remains predominantly limited to small-scale or prototype systems. This study addresses three complementary objectives aimed at informing future computer-vision-based PLF research and development in commercially housed laying hens. First, a systematic literature review was conducted to identify welfare-related categories monitored in laying hens between 2005 and 2025, the methods used to assess them, and the extent to which automated monitoring approaches have been applied. Second, outcomes of a TransRegional Expert Panel (TREP) within the OMELETTE project were synthesised to rank priority welfare challenges, evaluate the feasibility of different monitoring approaches, and compare expert perspectives with trends identified in the literature. Third, two pan-tilt-zoom (PTZ) camera setups implemented in semi-commercial aviary systems were described as proof-of-concept examples illustrating how multiple welfare challenges can be monitored using a single, multipurpose camera system. The literature review revealed a pronounced imbalance in monitoring frequency, with feather pecking dominating the literature while several other welfare challenges, including piling, disturbed sleep, and toe-pecking, remain comparatively underrepresented. TREP outcomes confirmed feather pecking as the highest-priority welfare challenge but also highlighted the importance of integrated monitoring approaches that combine time-intensive assessments, shorter checklists, and automated systems rather than relying on single indicators. Experts further considered the use of digital devices during routine barn inspections to be practically feasible. The PTZ proof-of-concept demonstrates how priority welfare challenges identified through both literature and expert input can be operationalised through automated, scheduled, and location-specific monitoring under commercial conditions. Together, these findings highlight the need for future PLF research to move beyond isolated measurements and small-scale trials towards integrated, cost-effective, and farm-specific welfare-monitoring systems that support adaptive, data-informed management strategies-for example, within a Plan-Do-Check-Act framework-and enable the development of digital standard operating procedures that generate actionable insights under real-world commercial constraints.

Indexed as

automated welfare monitoringcommercialisationexpert opinionsfeather peckinglaying henspan-tilt-zoom camerasprecision livestock farming

Identifiers

PMID42738583
PMCPMC13565337

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.