Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39935775›Full record

ReviewAnimal welfare (South Mimms, England)2025

A new future for dog breeding.

Helle Friis Proschowsky, Maja Louise Arendt, Brenda N Bonnett, Camilla S Bruun, Irena Czycholl, Merete Fredholm, Dan O'Neill, James A Serpell, Peter Sandøe

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal welfare (South Mimms, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Helle Friis ProschowskyDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 8, DK-1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-4116-9749
Maja Louise ArendtDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Dyrlægevej 16, DK-1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1404-172X
Brenda N BonnettB Bonnett Consulting, Georgian Bluffs, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7163-1331
Camilla S BruunDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 8, DK-1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3665-0016
Irena CzychollDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 8, DK-1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9365-7495
Merete FredholmDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 8, DK-1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3563-7648
Dan O'NeillPathobiology and Population Sciences, The Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, North Mymms, Hatfield, Herts AL9 7TA, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1115-2723
James A SerpellSchool Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2826-1187
Peter SandøeDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 8, DK-1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0397-3273

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The modern idea of purebred dogs has come under increasing critical scrutiny over recent decades. In light of this critical focus and other developments in society, some new trends in how companion dogs are bred and acquired have emerged. This means a diminishing influence from traditional kennel clubs with more dogs being sold without a pedigree, stricter legal restrictions on dog breeding, growing popularity of deliberate crosses of established breeds (i.e. so-called designer breeds) and growing hype around the benefits of mixed-breed dogs. We give an overview of these trends and discuss to what extent they will serve to promote dogs that are innately healthy, have good welfare and function well in their various roles in today's world. We argue that newly invented designer breeds and mixed breeds also have worrying health and behavioural problems, and that the predictability of purebred dogs with respect to body size, basic behaviours, known need for grooming, disorder profiles and other attributes may well offer some benefits for a satisfying human-dog relationship seen from both sides. The optimal future seems to lie in the middle ground, where the future organised dog world (i.e. kennel and breed clubs or their successor organisations) will need to re-open the breed registries, remove wording from breed standards that currently promotes extreme conformation, support selection against disease-predisposing genotypes and phenotypes and refocus dog showing and breeding to promote health and appropriate behaviour.

Indexed as

Animal welfaredesigner breedextreme conformationhealthy breedingmixed breedpurebred dog

Identifiers

PMID39935775
PMCPMC11810519

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.