ArticleCanine genetics and epidemiology2018
Assessing the relative importance of health and conformation traits in the cavalier king Charles spaniel.
Article in Canine genetics and epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring Pet Owner Preferences in Order to Assess the Role of Cost and Quality of Life in Anti-Pruritic Treatment Plan Selection for Dog Owners.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe selection of a future breeding dog is a complicated task, in which disease characteristics and different traits have to be combined and weighed against one another. Truncation selection, that is the exclusion of affected animals, may be very inefficient when selecting on a large number of traits, and may result in a reduction of the genetic diversity in a population or breed. Selection could be facilitated by the use of a selection index that combines multiple traits or breeding values into one score. This however requires a consideration of their relative value according to their economic weight, which is difficult to express in monetary units for health traits. The use of a choice experiment to derive non-market values might be a solution to this problem. This is a pilot study to assess the potential use of choice experiments to ascertain the public preference and relative importance attached to health- and conformation traits in the selection of a Cavalier King Charles spaniel. The focus was on two prevalent disorders, mitral valve disease and syringomyelia, and on several important conformation traits such as muzzle length and eye shape. Based on available prior information, a Bayesian D-optimal design approach was used to develop a choice experiment and the resulting choice sets.
resultsEvery participant (breeder or owner) in the choice experiment was presented with a total of 17 choice sets, in which at most four traits could vary to reduce the cognitive burden. A total of 114 respondents participated in the choice experiment and results showed that respondents (breeders/owners) current attitudes were directed towards health (syringomyelia and mitral valve disease), followed by eye shape and level of inbreeding.
conclusionsThis approach identifies the value breeders and owners attach to certain traits in the breeding objective. The resulting relative weights, represented as the logworths obtained from the choice experiment, could be an alternative to economic weights. They could be implemented as a weight when breeding values are available, but more study on this topic will be necessary. A challenge in this approach is to scale up the experiment with additional traits. Moreover, for other traits, the genetic parameters and correlations should be known first, in order to include them in the health selection index as well.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.