ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2022
Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine?
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine?Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFormulating sophisticated fluid therapy plans can be complicated and time consuming. Consequently, veterinarians in the field who lack experience, time, or confidence may formulate suboptimal fluid therapy plans.
objectivesCompare conventional and app-guided fluid therapy plans for simulated cases of neonatal calf diarrhea.
participantsThird and fourth year veterinary students (n = 55) from The University of Sydney.
methodsWe developed a web app to assist fluid therapy formulation (http://calfaid.com) that was evaluated in a randomized case simulation trial. Participants were instructed to perform fluid therapy calculations and formulate an integrated fluid therapy plan for case scenarios using conventional methods and using the fluid therapy app. Responses were scored by a blinded study investigator using an a priori scoring guide and groups (conventional vs. app-guided) were compared using linear mixed models.
resultsOn average, total scores for app-guided fluid therapy calculations were 20.6% points higher (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.1-27.1) than calculations completed using the conventional method (88.2% vs. 67.5%, respectively). On average, total scores for app-guided integrated fluid therapy plans were 14.2% points higher (95% CI, 6.3-22.2; 65.8% vs. 51.2%). Eighty percent of respondents indicated they would prefer to use the app-guided method over the conventional method. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Our findings suggest that fluid therapy plans can be improved using apps.
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.