Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39717037›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

Measuring the One Health impacts associated with creating access to veterinary care before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Sloane M Hawes, Kaleigh M O'Reilly, Tess M Mascitelli, Jordan Winczewski, Romi Dazzio, Amanda Arrington, Kevin N Morris

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 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

7 authors.

Sloane M HawesInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO, United States.
Kaleigh M O'ReillyInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO, United States.
Tess M MascitelliInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO, United States.
Jordan WinczewskiInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO, United States.
Romi DazzioInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO, United States.
Amanda ArringtonPets for Life, The Humane Society of the United States, Washington, DC, United States.
Kevin N MorrisInstitute for Human-Animal Connection, Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Integrating community perceptions into One Health assessments is critical to understanding the structural barriers that create disproportionate health outcomes for community members, their pets, and the ecosystems that encompass them, particularly in historically marginalized and under-resourced communities. The validated One Health Community Assessment (OHCA) survey instrument was used to evaluate the associated impacts of The Humane Society of the United States' Pets for Life (PFL) programming on communities' perceptions of One Health. This evaluation took place across two phases, totaling four years. In phase one (May 2018 - December 2019), the PFL intervention was administered to one urban and one rural under-resourced community, while two demographically-paired communities served as comparison sites. Five OHCA subscales (human health, pet health, environmental health, community health, perceived links) were employed to measure changes in perceptions of One Health and fourteen OHCA items were used to measure perceptions of access to human healthcare, pet care, and the environment. Initiation of the confirmatory second phase of the study (May 2020-October 2021), in which all four communities received the intervention, coincided with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic and its resulting public health mandates hindered both PFL programming and data collection. Generalized Estimating Equations were employed in both the first and second phase analyses to model changes in perceptions of One Health associated with the PFL intervention. In the study's first phase, PFL in the urban community was associated with significant increases in perceptions of community health and environmental health, and perceived access to human health care, pet care, and the environment. The presence of PFL during the study's second phase was associated with increased perceptions of environmental health. The variables of PFL and the pandemic were not able to be isolated within the analyses. However, due to the severe, negative One Health implications associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, the phase two results were interpreted from the perspective of the pandemic being the largest driver of the results. The results are consistent with previous research on the effects of the pandemic on community perceptions of health. These findings offer initial support for the hypothesis that deployment of resources focused on companion animals may affect perceptions across the One Health triad and confirms previous research on effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health Services AccessibilityOne HealthPetsAdultAnimalsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesVeterinary Medicineaccess to veterinary carecompanion animalsCOVID-19One HealthOne Health Community Assessmentsocial determinants of animal healthsocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID39717037
PMCPMC11663895

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.