ReviewPloS one2025
A mapping review of worldwide current and previous cohort research programmes in cats and dogs.
Review in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The application of artificial intelligence in veterinary oncology: a scoping review.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
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
Cohort research programmes follow individuals over time to enable study of effects from various factors on health or other outcomes. To date, the global distribution of formal cohort programmes in cats and dogs has not been mapped, and a comprehensive synthesis of their methodological characteristics is lacking. That limits methods improvement and wider adoption of cohort programmes in veterinary medicine. A mapping review methodology aligned with the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis was used to summarise existing cohort research programmes on cats and dogs worldwide. Electronic databases were searched (Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science) to identify eligible cohort papers, followed by a two-step selection process (title and abstract screening, full text screening) for paper inclusion. Information extracted at the individual cohort programme level covered: 1. location and veterinary specialty; 2. study design; 3. study variables; 4. collected data; 5. recruitment and retention strategies. Database searches yielded 6,777 unique papers, of which 73 met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two programmes were identified, predominantly in the UK (8/22, 36%) or US (6/22, 27%) with 55% (12/22) involving dogs. Most of the programmes (18/22, 82%) aimed at disease prevention. Out of 19 programmes for which full-text papers were available, and therefore more information could be extracted, animal demographics were the most commonly considered study variable (15/19, 79%). The biggest reporting gaps were identified in the study planning phase, design, and programme management. Consequently, limited information was retrievable from the programmes papers to create learning opportunities for other researchers planning future cohort programmes. Improved or new reporting practices are needed to enhance knowledge sharing and promote cohort programmes in veterinary medicine. The study protocol was preregistered on the 27th of December 2023 (https://osf.io/wkg53/).
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.