Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41463902›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025

Assessment of the Awareness and Use of Quality of Life Tools in Small Animal Practices in Germany.

Friederike Felicitas Rhein, Rebecca Klee, Balazs Albrecht, Stephanie Krämer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Friederike Felicitas RheinProfessorship of Laboratory Animal Science and Animal Welfare & Interdisciplinary Centre for Animal Welfare Research 3R (ICAR3R), Justus Liebig University Giessen, Frankfurter Str. 95, 35392 Giessen, Germany.ORCID 0009-0006-9319-7253
Rebecca KleeBoehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica GmbH, Binger Straße 173, 55216 Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9219-8581
Balazs AlbrechtBoehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica GmbH, Binger Straße 173, 55216 Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.
Stephanie KrämerProfessorship of Laboratory Animal Science and Animal Welfare & Interdisciplinary Centre for Animal Welfare Research 3R (ICAR3R), Justus Liebig University Giessen, Frankfurter Str. 95, 35392 Giessen, Germany.

Funding

Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica GmbH 472108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The assessment of animal welfare and quality of life (QoL) is a critical aspect of veterinary practice. While the development of standardized tools to measure QoL has been widely discussed, there is limited research analyzing how these tools are applied in clinical practice. This study investigates the current state of QoL assessment in small animal medicine in Germany through a mixed-methods approach. A survey was conducted with veterinarians and veterinary assistants, assessing the awareness and use of QoL assessment tools in practice. In addition, interviews with veterinarians were conducted to examine their perceptions and experiences regarding the use of QoL measurement tools and the assessment of QoL itself. The findings indicate that the use of standardized QoL assessments is rare and often primarily done while doing studies. Factors hindering the widespread use of these instruments include lack of time, lack of awareness, the perceived lack of need and resistance to fitting the individuality and subjectivity of QoL into a schema. As beneficial features of such tools, veterinarians mentioned the possibility of documenting and tracking QoL and the enhancement of the relationship between professionals and clients. Further research should therefore not only focus on development but also on dissemination of such tools.

Indexed as

assessmentcatcompanion animalsdoginstrumentquality of lifetool

Identifiers

PMID41463902
PMCPMC12730036

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.