Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34143850›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Managing conflicting ethical concerns in modern small animal practice-A comparative study of veterinarian's decision ethics in Austria, Denmark and the UK.

Svenja Springer, Peter Sandøe, Herwig Grimm, Sandra A Corr, Annemarie T Kristensen, Thomas Bøker Lund

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. What WouldVeterinary sciences · 2021
    Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Svenja SpringerUnit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-8961-752X
Peter SandøeDepartment of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-0397-3273
Herwig GrimmUnit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Sandra A CorrDivision of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Annemarie T KristensenDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Science, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Thomas Bøker LundDepartment of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-5282-1562

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Small animal veterinarians frequently have to manage conflicting interests. Beside the key consideration of the patient's interests, small animal veterinarians are often challenged to consider not only client's emotional needs, but also their own personal aspirations to provide quality patient care and to make a good living as a professional. Further, veterinarians have an interest in continuous professional development and the use of the newest treatments, which may influence their decision-making process. Based on published work, we hypothesize the existence of four decision ethics orientations that veterinarians can use to manage potentially conflicting concerns. These are: the patient-focused, the client-empathetic, the client-devolved and the development-oriented decision ethics orientations. We surveyed small animal veterinarians in Austria, Denmark, and the UK using a questionnaire (N = 648), and successfully identified the four decision ethics orientations in all three countries. The patient-focused and client-empathetic decision ethics orientations are salient in all countries, whereas Danish and UK veterinarians are slightly more client-empathetic and client-devolved compared to their Austrian colleagues. Across countries our findings show that experienced and older veterinarians tend to be more client-empathetic. Younger and less experienced professionals are more development-oriented compared to their older and more experienced colleagues. In contrast to other studies investigating ethical issues in small animal practice, we found no evidence that gender plays a decisive role in the tendency towards any decision ethics orientation. We also show that veterinarians with a higher client-empathetic orientation and development-orientation more often discuss the possibility of health insurance with clients who do not have it. The present study provides a first empirical insight into how veterinarians manage challenging expectations and ethical concerns as part of decision making in modern small animal practice.

Indexed as

VeterinariansAnimalsAustriaDecision MakingDenmarkHumansProfessional-Patient RelationsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomVeterinary Medicine

Identifiers

PMID34143850
PMCPMC8213188

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.