ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2024
Best practices for recruitment in veterinary clinical trials.
Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence of rs850683722 Variant and Its Influence on the Course of Myxomatous Mitral Valve Disease in 105 Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Dogs in the Polish Population.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Pet Owners' Knowledge of Antibiotic Use and Antimicrobial Resistance and Their Antibiotic Practices: Comparison Between Contexts of Self and Pet.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The role of regulatory T cells in central nervous system diseases in dogs: fighting with a double-edged sword toward translational discoveries.American journal of translational research · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the surface thermal response of peripheral nerve blocks in dogs undergoing trauma or orthopedic surgery.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Evaluation and spatiotemporal evolution of veterinary talent competitiveness: a new perspective of veterinary education.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A successful clinical trial requires participants, but many factors can impede effective study recruitment. To better recruit for quality veterinary clinical trials in client-owned animals that lead to improved evidence-based patient care and outcomes, there is a collective need to share and implement current best practices for recruitment strategies. These strategies should utilize a holistic view of recruitment, encompassing study design and logistics, representative participation, incentives, personnel resources, advertising, and participant retention. Although human clinical trial data and resources can provide guidance, effort also needs to be put into evaluating current practices and opportunities for process improvement that are specific to the conduct of veterinary clinical trials. Considering the power of pets as naturally occurring models of disease and as sentinels, improved conduct of veterinary clinical research has the potential to inform human health outcomes. Continued development of collaborations surrounding best practices and training opportunities in veterinary clinical research will improve the impact of veterinary clinical trials teams, while also promoting workforce development and alternate career paths for veterinary professionals.
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.