Animal protection reporting requirements of Canadian veterinarians: Example case.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Animal Abuse Reporting and the Ethical Role of Veterinarians: A Comparative Review of Practices in South Korea, Canada, and the United States.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
   Review
2. Addressing animal abuse and neglect in the veterinary profession.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2025
   Article
3. Drug use stigma, accidental pet poisonings, and veterinary care: results from a survey of pet owners in Vancouver, British Columbia.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025
   Article
4. Veterinary Medical Ethics.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2024
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as