ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2024
Development of a web-based tool to assess daily rating of perceived exertion in agility dogs.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop a web-based tool for daily use by agility handlers to log rating of perceived exertion (RPE) for dogs as an aid in quantifying daily exercise and training load and to improve training and conditioning strategies. Procedures: Focus group meetings with small groups of handlers were conducted via internet-based video conferencing using a semi-structured interview format. Meeting notes were coded for reflexive thematic analysis. The RPE logging tool was revised based on handler feedback. Each handler was asked to log their dog's daily RPE data for 1 week. Data were analyzed to assess compliance and timeliness of entries. Participants completed a post-logging questionnaire to provide feedback about their experiences. Results: Eighteen agility dog handlers participated in all phases of the project. Handler and dog demographics were similar to previously reported demographics of agility participants in the United States. Reflexive thematic analysis of their comments related to the initial draft RPE logging tool yielded 3 initial themes, all of which supported a fourth and major theme: the need for specific and detailed training resources before agility handlers utilized the RPE tool. Of 18 handlers, 14 (78%) submitted logging records for the full week. Median time for data entry was 87 s (IQR = 56-117 s), and 92% of logging records were entered within 1 day of the events which were being recorded. In the follow-up questionnaire the handlers did not identify any major concerns. Based on all available data from the handlers, a final version of the RPE logging tool was produced. Conclusion and clinical relevance: Agility dog handlers are very interested in developing and validating tools to quantify training load for their dogs. The final RPE logging tool was quick and easy to use. Further validation of this logging tool is required with a larger number of handlers and comparison to physiologic data from exercising dogs.
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.