Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31796018›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2019

A novel approach to welfare interventions in problem multi-cat households.

Kayleigh Hill, David Yates, Rachel Dean, Jenny Stavisky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Kayleigh HillGreater Manchester Animal Hospital, 411 Eccles New Road, Salford, M5 5NN, UK.
David YatesGreater Manchester Animal Hospital, 411 Eccles New Road, Salford, M5 5NN, UK.
Rachel DeanCentre for Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, College Road, Loughborough, LE12 5RD, UK.
Jenny StaviskyCentre for Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, College Road, Loughborough, LE12 5RD, UK. Jenny.Stavisky@nottingham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1220-5690

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThousands of injured, stray and relinquished cats are received at the RSPCA Greater Manchester Animal Hospital each year. A significant and challenging proportion of these cats are confiscated from multicat households by RSPCA Inspectors, due to the owners' inability to care for them. These households share many characteristics of animal hoarding, including poor owner compliance with suggested welfare improvements and recidivism. The relatively poor adoption potential of animals from such households are a perennial problem for the charity. The aim of this study was to determine if offering female cat neutering assistance to multi-cat owners significantly improved colony welfare.

resultsTen multicat households with a history of public complaint to the RSPCA were recruited. An RSPCA veterinary surgeon (VS) initially assessed the overall welfare of each household's cat population, individual cat welfare and the living environment. All entire female cats aged over 8 weeks were neutered and basic animal care education provided. Follow up visits were completed two and 12 months later to reassess welfare parameters and population numbers. The total number of cats was 176 across ten households (range 7-33, median 16). All owners consented to having all entire female cats spayed. At the first visit, mean individual cat welfare scores ranged from 5.4-8.7/ 16 across the 10 households, where 16 represented best possible welfare. Overall household mean welfare scores were significantly improved at both the 2 month and 12 month revisits (p = 0.011 and p = 0.01 respectively) when compared to the initial visits. By the end of the study period, three out of the ten households had voluntarily relinquished all of their cats, and overall there was a 40% reduction in the number of cats.

conclusionsAnimal hoarding has previously been an intractable welfare concern with little evidence informing intervention techniques. These results show that positive veterinary engagement on site, focused on preventative care and population control, can yield significant improvement in welfare scoring systems in relatively short timescales. Promptly collecting and neutering all female cats at a site, combined with advice and support, show promise in improving welfare.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimalsAnimal WelfareCatsEnglandFemaleHumansHysterectomyOvariectomyAnimal hoardingCatsFeline welfareMulticatNeuteringOverpopulationPreventativeVeterinary hoarding interventions

Identifiers

PMID31796018
PMCPMC6891977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.