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.

Reptiles 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.

Zoos are increasingly implementing formalized animal welfare assessment programs to allow monitoring of welfare over time, as well as to aid in resource prioritization. These programs tend to rely on assessment tools that incorporate resource-based and observational animal-focused measures. A narrative review of the literature was conducted to bring together recent studies examining welfare assessment methods in zoo animals. A summary of these methods is provided, with advantages and limitations of the approaches presented. We then highlight practical considerations with respect to implementation of these tools into practice, for example scoring schemes, weighting of criteria, and innate animal factors for consideration. It is concluded that there would be value in standardizing guidelines for development of welfare assessment tools since zoo accreditation bodies rarely prescribe these. There is also a need to develop taxon or species-specific assessment tools to complement more generic processes and more directly inform welfare management.

Animals’ facial expressions are widely used as a readout for emotion. Scientific interest in the facial expressions of laboratory animals has centered primarily on negative experiences, such as pain, experienced as a result of scientific research procedures. Recent attempts to standardize evaluation of facial expressions associated with pain in laboratory animals has culminated in the development of “grimace scales”. The prevention or relief of pain in laboratory animals is a fundamental requirement for in vivo research to satisfy community expectations. However, to date it appears that the grimace scales have not seen widespread implementation as clinical pain assessment techniques in biomedical research. In this review, we discuss some of the barriers to implementation of the scales in clinical laboratory animal medicine, progress made in automation of collection, and suggest avenues for future research.

There is an increasing focus on evidence-based welfare assessment by animal care staff in zoos, along with a strong interest in animal welfare by the zoo-visiting public, to the extent that this can influence their choice of institutions to visit. Regulatory oversight of animal welfare standards continues to strengthen across many jurisdictions. Zoos are increasingly formalizing their practices with the development and refinement of evidence-based welfare assessment tools. There has been a drive for welfare assessment tools to comprise both resource-based and animal-based measures. However, animal-based indicators are not always well characterized, in terms of their nature and whether they infer a positive or negative affective state. This is especially so for reptiles, which are often considered behaviorally inexpressive and are under-researched. In this study, a Delphi consultation approach was used to gather expert opinion on the suitability of potential animal-based indicators of welfare for inclusion in a welfare assessment tool across four families of reptiles: Agamidae, Chelidae, Pythonidae, and Testudinidae. Two rounds of online surveys were conducted eliciting responses from a global group of professionals who work with reptiles. In the first survey, respondents were provided with an author-derived list of potential animal-based indicators for consideration of their validity and practicality as welfare indicators. The indicators were refined for the second survey including only those indicators that were considered valid or practical on the first survey (≥4 on a 5-point Likert scale), and that achieved ≥70% consensus amongst experts. In the second survey, respondents were asked to re-evaluate the reliability and practicality of the indicators and to rank them on these facets. Eight to ten assessment indicators for each family of reptiles were identified from Survey 2. These indicators were often health related, for example, presence of oculo-nasal discharge or wounds. However, some true behavioral indicators were identified, such as showing species-specific interest and alertness. These indicators should now be incorporated into taxon-tailored welfare assessment tools for trial and validation in captive reptile populations. This study provides a next step towards developing reptile-specific animal welfare assessment tools for these often-overlooked animals.