ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026
Protecting Companion Animals Under Chinese Criminal Law: Current Practice and Future Paths.
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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
China's legal system currently lacks a comprehensive animal protection law, and its Criminal Law contains no specific offense for animal cruelty. Consequently, judicial protection for companion animals relies on offenses designed to safeguard human interests, such as intentional destruction of property, theft, and releasing hazardous substances, manifesting a distinct characteristic of indirect protection. This study systematically reviews criminal cases to examine the current state of animal protection provided by Chinese criminal law, identifying the fundamental limitation that such protection is merely incidental or reflective. The research findings indicate that while current frameworks are human-centric, there is significant untapped potential within existing statutes. Specifically, this article advocates for utilizing the crime of illegal use of information networks and other relevant offenses to address the critical regulatory gap concerning the production, sale, and dissemination of animal torture media. This pragmatic solution offers a valuable reference for jurisdictions facing similar legislative voids where specialized animal protection laws are unlikely to be enacted in the short term, promoting a more effective utilization of existing criminal doctrines to safeguard animal welfare.
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.