Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42278170›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Factors Influencing Decision-Making in Companion Animal Euthanasia: A Mixed-Methods Study of Pet Owners and Veterinarians.

Annamária Kiss, Wieka Möller, Zsombor Wagenhoffer, Kinga Fodor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. 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.

Annamária KissDepartment of Laboratory Animal Science and Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest, 1078 Budapest, Hungary.
Wieka MöllerDepartment of Laboratory Animal Science and Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest, 1078 Budapest, Hungary.
Zsombor WagenhofferInstitute for Animal Breeding, Nutrition and Laboratory Animal Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest, 1078 Budapest, Hungary.
Kinga FodorDepartment of Laboratory Animal Science and Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest, 1078 Budapest, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Euthanasia in companion animal practice represents one of the most emotionally and ethically challenging decisions in veterinary medicine, requiring clinical judgment, effective communication, and sensitivity toward both animal welfare and pet owner well-being. This mixed-methods exploratory study investigated decision-making in small animal euthanasia from both pet owner and veterinarian perspectives. An online questionnaire completed by 228 pet owners from 17 countries was supplemented by two semi-structured interviews involving small animal veterinarians with different professional backgrounds. The qualitative interview component was exploratory and was used to contextualize the survey findings. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, while qualitative responses were examined thematically. Illness (63.3%) and age-related decline (31.6%) were the most frequently reported reasons for euthanasia. Most pet owners assessed their animal's condition through personal observation (53.5%) or veterinary advice (39.2%), whereas structured quality-of-life tools were rarely used (7.3%). Emotional attachment represented the most influential factor in decision-making (69.3%). Pet owners who explicitly reported receiving emotional support from their veterinarian experienced significantly lower emotional burden (Holm-adjusted

Indexed as

animal welfarecompanion animaldecision-makingend-of-life careeuthanasiaquality of lifeveterinary communication

Identifiers

PMID42278170
PMCPMC13256030

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.