ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025
Harnessing RSPCA Stakeholder Expertise to Co-Produce a Complex Intervention Addressing Childhood and Adolescent Animal Harm.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Childhood and Adolescent Animal Harm (CAAH) is influenced by biological, psychological and socio-environmental risk factors. Interventions to prevent animal harm among children and young people are essential for fostering empathy and reducing future harm. This study explores the perspectives of RSPCA stakeholders, to co-produce a redeveloped version of 'Breaking the Chain', an intervention addressing youth animal harm. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 RSPCA employees across a range of departments and geographical locations in England, UK. Thematic analysis was used to identify key insights on target groups, intervention content, delivery methods, and evaluation strategies. Two primary target groups were identified: universal audiences (primary school-aged children) and high-risk youth. Participants advocated for retaining the core content of the existing intervention while modernising resources to address contemporary risk factors, such as online exposure to animal harm while ensuring accessibility for neurodiverse audiences. Face-to-face delivery was favoured, complemented by digital resources. Evaluation was viewed as critical, with a focus on both short-term outcomes and long-term impact. This study highlights the importance of stakeholder involvement in co-producing effective cruelty prevention interventions. Future steps will involve a coproduction study with children and young people to gather their perspectives on the intervention redesign. This will be followed by a pilot and evaluation of the redesigned intervention, incorporating feedback from both the implementers (e.g., teachers, youth offending teams, RSPCA employees) and the recipients (children and young people).
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.