ArticleVeterinary sciences2026
Translating Sustainable Development Goals into Veterinary Action: A Structured Priority-Setting Framework.
Article in Veterinary sciences, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Veterinary institutions need practical methods to translate the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into profession-specific priorities. This study developed a two-phase priority-setting framework linking systematic SDG screening with multi-criteria decision analysis. First, all 169 SDG targets were screened using four veterinary-relevant dimensions. The 48 retained targets were synthesized into 27 preliminary concepts, refined through two rounds of structured internal expert evaluation, and harmonized by the research team into 27 final decision alternatives. Second, Budgetary Burden, Accessibility and Scope, Implementation Timeline, and Sustainability Impact were weighted using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and the 27 alternatives were ranked using TOPSIS. Robustness was assessed through Monte Carlo criterion-weight perturbation, score aggregation, and leave-one-expert-out analyses. Budgetary Burden (0.4025) and Sustainability Impact (0.3526) received the largest weights. Prevention of Zoonotic Diseases ranked first (C
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.