ArticleActa veterinaria Scandinavica2025
Companion animal and equine clinical research: a Nordic perspective.
Article in Acta veterinaria Scandinavica, 2025. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe societal value of cats, dogs and horses is high, and the companion and sport animal health care sector is growing. Clinical research concerning cats, dogs and horses is crucial for the development of evidence-based medical care that benefits animals and their owners, and has implications for human and environmental health from a One Health perspective. Basic information on companion animal and equine research enables more directed measures to improve conditions for research within the area. The aim of the present study was to describe Nordic companion animal and equine clinical research from 2010 to 2019, including bibliometrics, human resources and funding.
resultsThere were 2 042 published research publications originating from Nordic countries on cats (n = 282), dogs (n = 1 086), and horses (n = 781) from 2010 to 2019. The majority (83%) of the publications came from the four Nordic universities with veterinary programs. Seven percent of the publications were collaborations between two or more Nordic universities. Approximately 18% of the PhD theses (178 out of 970) from veterinary faculties or corresponding units concerned these species, most of them dogs (n = 86), followed by horses (n = 64), cats (n = 15) or a combination of these species (n = 13). The scientific areas cardiology, infectious diseases, reproduction, and surgery were prominent for all three species. A large proportion of grants were received from small- to medium-sized funding bodies, mainly funding running costs and only to a limited degree salaries. During 2010-2019, costs for veterinary and other services for cats and dogs steadily increased. The growth of the veterinary healthcare sector was not reflected in an increasing number of clinical research publications, for which no increase was seen after 2014.
conclusionsDespite a high societal value of the species, veterinary clinical research on sports and companion animals has not increased, in contrast to the veterinary healthcare sector. Activities stimulating the research area, e.g. funding bodies enabling coverage of salaries, are needed. The development of Nordic veterinary clinical care may benefit from strengthened research cooperation between countries.
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.