ArticleVeterinary evidence
Enhancing veterinary systematic and scoping reviews reporting for better identification and dissemination in VetSRev.
Article in Veterinary evidence. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Veterinary medicine advances rapidly, generating extensive amounts of research. Systematic and scoping reviews synthesise evidence to help guide clinical decisions, improve welfare, influence policy, and shape research priorities. Unlike narrative reviews, they employ transparent, rigorous methods. This commentary presents insights from curating VetSRev, a more than a decade-old, freely accessible repository containing an interactive list of published veterinary systematic and scoping reviews. Accessible, high-quality reviews strengthen public and owner trust, improve animal welfare, and promote evidence-based practice. Following established protocols and guidelines ensures quality, visibility, and VetSRev inclusion, thereby disseminating the reviews to users, advancing knowledge, informing research priorities, and enhancing clinical decision-making in veterinary medicine.
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.