Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36899633›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

Two Worlds in One: What 'Counts' as Animal Advocacy for Veterinarians Working in UK Animal Research?

Renelle McGlacken, Alistair Anderson, Pru Hobson-West

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Rehoming Laboratory Rats: Exploring Perceptions of Rehomers, Animal Technicians, and Biomedical Researchers.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Renelle McGlackenSchool of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0884-3347
Alistair AndersonSchool of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2385-0211
Pru Hobson-WestSchool of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6105-0747
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 205393/B/16/ZWellcome Trust 205393/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concept of advocacy is of increasing importance to the veterinary profession internationally. However, there are concerns around the ambiguity and complexity of acting as an advocate in practice. This paper explores what 'animal advocacy' involves for veterinarians working in the domain of animal research, where they are responsible for advising on health and welfare. In focusing on the identity of veterinarians working in an arena of particular contestation, this paper provides empirical insights into how veterinarians themselves perform their role as an 'animal advocate'. Analysing interview data with 33 UK 'Named Veterinary Surgeons', this paper therefore examines what 'counts' as animal advocacy for veterinarians, considering the way their role as animal advocate is performed. Focusing on the themes of 'mitigating suffering', 'speaking for', and 'driving change' as three central ways in which veterinarians working in animal research facilities act as animal advocates, we draw out some of the complexities for veterinarians working in areas where animal care and harm coexist. Finally, we conclude by calling for further empirical exploration of animal advocacy in other veterinary domains and for more critical attention to the wider social systems which produce the need for such advocacy.

Indexed as

advocacyanimal researchlaboratory scienceresponsibilityveterinary profession

Identifiers

PMID36899633
PMCPMC10000174
OpenAlexW4321495851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read1
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.