Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39595219›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Examining the Relationship Between Social Vulnerability and Animal Shelter Intakes and Outcomes: Patterns and Implications.

Sue M Neal, Tom Kremer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. 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
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Sue M NealDepartment of Political Science, Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR 72401, USA.
Tom KremerHuman Animal Support Services, Austin, TX 78703, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: This study investigates the impact of social vulnerability, as quantified by the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), on animal shelter intakes and adoptions, and the flow of animals between SVI groups at seven shelters within the United States. Understanding how social vulnerability influences these factors is crucial for developing targeted interventions to improve shelter outcomes and community support programs. (2) Methods: The research analyzed intake and adoption data from multiple animal shelters to assess the relationship between the social vulnerability at intake and adoption locations based on Census Tract obtained from addresses, focusing on comparison across strays, seized animals, and owner surrenders. Effect sizes were calculated to determine the magnitude and practical implications of these relationships. The study also examined the distribution of outcomes and reasons for animal surrender in relation to SVI levels. (3) Results: The analysis found that animals tended to enter shelters from areas of higher vulnerability while being adopted out to homes from all levels of vulnerability. Stray animals and those seized by authorities were more likely to come from high-SVI areas and showed a stronger disparity between intake and adoption SVI levels than owner surrenders. Racial/ethnic minority status and socioeconomic status were the components of the SVI that produced the strongest differences between intake and adoption vulnerability levels. Adoptions, however, were evenly distributed across different SVI levels, suggesting equitable access to adoption services. The study also identified that animals from high-SVI areas were not euthanized at higher rates compared to those from lower-SVI areas. (4) Conclusions: The findings highlight the need for further investigation into the high numbers of stray adult dogs in areas of communities that are most socially vulnerable as well as programs to address the volume of young animals originating from these areas. The equitable distribution of adoptions across SVI levels suggests that shelters are effectively engaging with socioeconomically and racially/ethnically diverse communities. Future research should focus on exploring the dynamics of stray animal intakes and enforcement patterns to enhance community and animal welfare initiatives.

Indexed as

animal adoptionsanimal shelteringanimal surrenderequityeuthanasia

Identifiers

PMID39595219
PMCPMC11591470

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.