Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37443961›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

Veterinary Expert: Legal Nature and Responsibility.

Andrzej Dzikowski

Abstract 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Addressing animal abuse and neglect in the veterinary profession.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2025
    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

1 author.

Andrzej DzikowskiDepartment of Food Hygiene and Public Health Protection, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, 159 Nowoursynowska St., 02-787 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-3223-7542

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Veterinary professional practice can be performed in many forms, including expert activity. The importance of veterinary expertise is, however, often underrated and limited to only one of its areas. Nonetheless, veterinary expert opinions have significant social, legal, and economic impacts. This study investigates veterinary expertise from an interdisciplinary, comparative perspective. Ethical and legal analysis and interpretation are performed. Essential concepts and relevant aspects of veterinary expertise are analysed. Legally relevant factors of an expert opinion are identified. The relationship between the law, the language, and the understanding of the role and duties of a veterinary proficient is demonstrated. A variety of possible expert opinions and the multiplicity of veterinary scopes of such activity is presented. It is argued that the ranges of forensic veterinary medicine and of veterinary expertise are broader than is predominantly assumed. Veterinary forensic medicine is a crucial part of veterinary specialisation. Ethical and legal basics, and the scope of veterinary expert's liability, are revealed and discussed. The conclusion is that the duties and responsibilities of expert veterinarians are particularly great due to the exercise of the public trust profession, with large importance for the whole society. Their observance is, however, crucial to ensure the highest quality of expert opinions issued by veterinarians.

Indexed as

civil lawexpertiseexpert opinionlegal procedurepenal lawveterinary ethicsveterinary forensic medicineveterinary law

Identifiers

PMID37443961
PMCPMC10339994

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.