↓ Skip to main content

Risk factors for saddle-related skin lesions on elephants used in the tourism industry in Thailand

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Risk factors for saddle-related skin lesions on elephants used in the tourism industry in Thailand
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12917-015-0438-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scarlett Magda, Olivia Spohn, Taweepoke Angkawanish, Dale A. Smith, David L. Pearl

Abstract

Lesions related to working conditions and improper saddle design are a concern for a variety of working animals including elephants. The objectives of the present study were to determine the prevalence of cutaneous lesions in anatomic regions (i.e., neck, girth, back, tail) in contact with saddle-related equipment among elephants in Thailand working in the tourism industry, and to identify potential risk factors associated with these lesions. Data for this cross-sectional study were collected between May 2007 and July 2007 on 194 elephants from 18 tourism camps across Thailand. There was a high prevalence (64.4 %; 95 % CI 57.3 - 71.2) of active lesions, most often located on the back region. Using multilevel multivariable logistic regression modelling containing a random intercept for camp we identified the following risk factors: increasing elephant age, the use of rice sacks as padding material in contact with the skin, and the provision of a break for the elephants. Working hours had a quadratic relationship with the log odds of an active lesion where the probability of an active lesion initially increased with the number of working hours per day and then declined possibly reflecting a "healthy worker" bias where only animals without lesions continue to be able to work these longer hours. While we recognize that the cross-sectional nature of the study posed some inferential limitations, our results offer several potential intervention points for the prevention of these lesions. Specifically, we recommend the following until longitudinal studies can be conducted: increased monitoring of older elephants and the back region of all elephants, working less than 6 hours per day, and the avoidance of rice sacks as padding material in contact with skin.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 18%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 13 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 16%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Environmental Science 4 9%
Psychology 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 14 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2015.
All research outputs
#11,427,604
of 14,414,062 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,332
of 2,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,729
of 284,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#106
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,414,062 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,150 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.