Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36611678›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Animal Control and Field Services Officers' Perspectives on Community Engagement: A Qualitative Phenomenology Study.

Liana R Moss, Sloane M Hawes, Katherine Connolly, Morgan Bergstrom, Kaleigh O'Reilly, Kevin N Morris

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Urban Cat Management in Australia-Evidence-Based Strategies for Success.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Liana R MossInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208, USA.
Sloane M HawesInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208, USA.
Katherine ConnollyInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208, USA.
Morgan BergstromInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208, USA.
Kaleigh O'ReillyInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208, USA.
Kevin N MorrisInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4533-0439

Funding

American Humane Endowed Chair research fund N/AAmerican Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 38257AAnonymous Donor N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Very little is known about the prevalence, scope, and methods of community engagement employed by animal control and field services officers to address the issue of animal cruelty and neglect. This study used a phenomenological approach to understand how officers defined community engagement. The researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with twenty-nine animal control and field services officers. The definitions of community engagement varied greatly across this sample of U.S. officers. However, most officers agreed that strategies such as relationship-building, providing assistance or information, and allowing time for compliance were among the most effective community engagement strategies. In addition, several barriers to incorporating community engagement strategies in the work of animal control professionals were identified. Future research and policymaking should seek to establish a consistent definition of community engagement in animal control and field services that can then be optimized for specific communities through rigorous evaluation.

Indexed as

animal controlanimal crueltyanimal neglectanimal protectioncommunity engagementfield services

Identifiers

PMID36611678
PMCPMC9817778

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.