Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40478885›Full record

ArticleThe Veterinary record2025

Qualitative interview study exploring Maltese veterinarians' practice of behavioural medicine.

Maria Debono, Amy Miele, Belinda Vigors

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Veterinary record, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Maria DebonoRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, UK.
Amy MieleRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, UK.
Belinda VigorsIndependent researcher, Ellesmere, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVeterinary behavioural medicine (VBM) is an emerging discipline, and behavioural support offered by veterinarians has been shown to positively impact One Welfare. However, the practice of VBM by veterinarians is reportedly limited. Research in this field is scant and predominantly quantitative in nature. This qualitative study aimed to explore the attitudes of small animal veterinarians in Malta towards VBM and canine mental health, their practice of VBM and any related barriers.

methodsQualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted, and a template analysis approach was applied to the collected data.

resultsEleven Malta-based veterinarians were interviewed. Their responses suggest a positive regard towards canine mental health, with opportunities for improvement in VBM practice. Potential barriers to the practice of VBM included knowledge gaps, time constraints, difficulties in communicating with clients, limited availability of trusted behavioural service providers (BSPs), challenges in establishing effective working relationships with BSPs and lack of BSP regulation. LIMITATIONS: The generalisability of the findings is limited due to the nature of the study, and recruitment bias was possible.

conclusionThis study highlights avenues for changes in veterinary practices that could positively impact One Welfare. Improving veterinary knowledge of VBM and regulating BSPs are suggested as key factors in achieving this goal.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelBehavior, AnimalVeterinariansVeterinary MedicineAdultAnimalsDogsFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMaltaQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID40478885
PMCPMC12232595

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.