Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30101107›Full record

ReviewVeterinary medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2015

Assessment of quality of life in veterinary practice: developing tools for companion animal carers and veterinarians.

Siobhan Mullan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Development of a Composite Pain Scale in Foals: A Pilot Study.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

1 author.

Siobhan MullanDepartment of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol Veterinary School, Bristol, UK, siobhan.mullan@bristol.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality-of-life assessments aim to provide an all-encompassing evaluation of animal welfare. In comparison to more limited, disease-focused welfare assessments, they have the potential to better identify welfare deficiencies, allowing veterinarians to target improvement strategies for greater benefit. Individuals or populations of companion animals may be assessed and carers and/or veterinarians may contribute to the assessment. Quality-of-life assessments are widely used within the human health care setting, and although the number of veterinary assessment tools is substantially fewer, these tools cover a range of methodologies. Further research to validate existing tools and develop new ones is recommended. Guidance for implementing and evaluating the usefulness of quality-of-life assessment tools within companion animal veterinary clinics is presented.

Indexed as

companion animalsevidence-based veterinary medicinequality of lifeveterinary practicewelfare

Identifiers

PMID30101107
PMCPMC6070017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 OpenQuestion graph.