ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2021
Measuring Changes in Perceptions of Access to Pet Support Care in Underserved Communities.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Access to veterinary care: evaluating working definitions, barriers, and implications for animal welfare.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Pooled it
- Assessing Animal Welfare and Service Needs in a Community-Based Program.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Demographic disparities in animal law enforcement: rates and outcomes.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- U.S. residents' self-reported access to veterinary care and implications for care-seeking decisions.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Centering community voices: advancing health equity for people and pets in Los Angeles County through community-based participatory research.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Community perspectives on dogs, health risks, and veterinary care impacts in rural Alaska.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Association of Socioeconomic Status and Reasons for Companion Animal Relinquishment.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- The development and validation of the One Health Community Assessment.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- Measuring the One Health impacts associated with creating access to veterinary care before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- The Impact of the Social Determinants of Human Health on Companion Animal Welfare.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Animal welfare deserts: human and nonhuman animal inequities.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Trends in Intake and Outcome Data From U.S. Animal Shelters From 2016 to 2020.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding social, economic, and structural barriers to accessing pet care services is important for improving the health and welfare of companion animals in underserved communities in the U.S. From May 2018-December 2019, six questions from the validated One Health Community Assessment were used to measure perceptions of access to pet care in two urban and two rural zip codes. One urban and one rural community received services from a pet support outreach program (Pets for Life), while the other served as a comparison community. After propensity score matching was performed to eliminate demographic bias in the sample (Urban = 512 participants, Rural = 234 participants), Generalized Estimating Equations were employed to compare the six measures of access to pet care between the intervention and comparison communities. The urban community with the Pets for Life intervention was associated with a higher overall measure of access to pet care compared to the urban site that did not have the Pets for Life intervention. When assessing each of the six measures of access to care, the urban community with the Pets for Life intervention was associated with higher access to affordable pet care options and higher access to pet care service providers who offer payment options than the community without the Pets for Life intervention. Further analyses with a subset of Pets for Life clients comparing pre-intervention and post-intervention survey responses revealed statistically significant positive trends in perceptions of two of the six measures of access to pet care. This study provides evidence that community-based animal welfare programming has the potential to increase perceptions of access to pet support services.
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.