Simple SummaryReptiles are commonly housed in wildlife parks and zoos, and are increasingly being kept as pets. Husbandry of reptiles is complex; signs of pain or disease can be challenging to recognize, and behavior is not always well understood. Therefore, assessment of reptile welfare may be difficult. In comparison to mammals, methods of welfare assessment in reptiles are under-investigated. In this paper we review the literature on welfare assessment techniques in reptiles. We determine that indicators of negative affective state are better characterized in reptiles, and are likely easier to apply in a welfare assessment tool. Indicators of positive affective state such as play behavior, and judgment bias experimental techniques, should be investigated further in reptiles. We also explore the application of the Welfare Quality® Protocol to the pygmy blue-tongue skink, an endangered species. This application presents examples of predominantly animal-based indicators that may be further investigated for use in a tool in this, and other reptile species.AbstractReptiles are held at wildlife parks and zoos for display and conservation breeding programs and are increasingly being kept as pets. Reliable indicators of welfare for reptiles need to be identified. Current guidelines for the captive management of reptiles utilize resource-based, rather than animal-based indicators; the latter being a more direct reflection of affective state. In this paper we review the literature on welfare assessment methods in reptiles with a focus on animal-based measures. We conclude that, whilst a number of physiological and behavioral indicators of welfare have been applied in reptiles, there is need for further validation of these methods across the diversity of species within the Class. Methods of positive welfare state assessment are comparatively understudied and need elucidation. Finally, we examine some widely-used welfare assessment tools in mammals and explore the application of the Welfare Quality® Protocol to the endangered pygmy blue-tongue skink, Tiliqua adelaidensis. We propose that this framework can form the basis for the development of taxon-specific tools with consideration of species-specific biology.

No abstract

Breast cancer survival rates have markedly improved. Consequently, survivorship issues have received increased attention. One common sequel of treatment is chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairment (CICI). CICI causes a range of impairments that can have a significant negative impact on quality of life. Knowledge of the prevalence of this condition is required to inform survivorship plans, and ensure adequate resource allocation and support is available for sufferers, hence a systematic review of prevalence data was performed. Medline, Scopus, CINAHL and PSYCHInfo were searched for eligible studies which included prevalence data on CICI, as ascertained though the use of self-report, or neuropsychological tests. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed. Findings were synthesised narratively, with meta-analyses being used to calculate pooled prevalence when impairment was assessed by neuropsychological tests. The review included 52 studies. Time-points considered ranged from the chemotherapy treatment period to greater than 10 years after treatment cessation. Summary prevalence figures (across time-points) using self-report, short cognitive screening tools and neuropsychological test batteries were 44%, 16% and 21–34% respectively (very low GRADE evidence). Synthesised findings demonstrate that 1 in 3 breast cancer survivors may have clinically significant cognitive impairment. Prevalence is higher when self-report based on patient experience is considered. This review highlights a number of study design issues that may have contributed to the low certainty rating of the evidence. Future studies should take a more consistent approach to the criteria used to assess impairment. Larger studies are urgently needed.

Animal welfare is not included in the Australian Constitution, rendering it a residual power of the states and territories. Commentators have suggested that inconsistencies exist between the state and territory statutes, and that a uniform approach would be beneficial. However, there has been no comprehensive assessment of the nature or extent of these purported inconsistencies. This review addresses this gap by providing a state-by-state comparison of animal protection statutes based on key provisions. Utilizing systematic review methodology, every current Australian statute with an enforceable protection provision relating to animal welfare was identified. A total of 436 statutes were examined, with 42 statutes being included in the detailed analysis. The comparison showed that animal protection laws are generally consistent between each Australian jurisdiction and were found to have similar shortcomings, notably including lack of a consistent definition of ‘animal’ and reliance on forms of legal punishment to promote animal welfare which have questionable effectiveness. It is argued that there is a need for attention to definitions of key terms and future consideration of alternative forms of penalties, but that a uniform federal approach may not be necessary to address these shortcomings.