Publikationsdatenbank

Study design quality and signalment of dogs used for research published in peer-reviewed journals (2023)

Art

Hochschulschrift

Autor

Schulte, Evelyn (WE 19)

Quelle

Berlin, 2023 — 54 Seiten

Sprache

Englisch

Verweise

URL (Volltext): https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/38171

Kontakt

Tierklinik für Fortpflanzung

Königsweg 65
Haus 27
14163 Berlin
+49 30 838 62618
fortpflanzungsklinik@vetmed.fu-berlin.de

Abstract / Zusammenfassung

In the past it has been criticised that only a low proportion of well-designed and well-reported studies in some medical specialities is available. Dogs are furthermore widely used in research to answer questions about canine or human conditions. For the latter, research dogs often are used as models since they are physiologically more similar to humans than other species used in research and share similar environmental conditions. From the veterinary perspective, research findings are widely based on academic research, and thus are generated under experimental conditions. In that regard the question arises if the dogs used for research adequately represent the dog population seen in veterinary practice. It may, for example, be assumed that often Beagle dogs are used as experimental animals. The objective of this study was to firstly systematically evaluate the quality of literature about canine medicine published in peer-reviewed journals in relation to six specific veterinary medicine specialities and furthermore to evaluate the signalment of dogs used in veterinary research. A literature search was conducted and 25 studies per speciality were selected. The quality of the articles (n = 150) published between 2007 and 2019 was evaluated with a validated checklist for the first study. The breed, sex, neuter status, median age, and median weight of the dogs used for clinical studies were additionally evaluated within a second study. The first study revealed deficits in articles related to all specialities, such as not adequate number of animals in 60.0% of the studies. In 88.0%, information about housing and feeding of the dogs were not specified. In 69.4% of the prospective clinical studies, an ethical approval was reported, and written informed consent of the owners was obtained in 46.2%. The findings revealed extensive deficits in the design and reporting of studies in canine medicine. The demand for improvement is obvious and should be addressed by authors, reviewers, and journal editors in the future. The specific guidelines for the different studies should be used. Our results underline that practitioners should critically appraise the quality of literature before implementing information into practice. The second study revealed a total of 596.542 dogs, that were used in the 150 trials. For 33.835 dogs out of these (5.7%), breed information was given. From the latter, 1.9% were Beagles. Nine clinical trials enrolled no other breeds than Beagles. Most frequently used breeds were German Shepherds (7.3%), Labrador Retrievers (6.7%) and Golden Retrievers (4.7%). Major reporting deficits found were missing breed specification in 25.3 % of the articles. Information about the sex of the dogs was lacking in 16.2 %, age and weight information missing in 22.7 and 32.7%, respectively. The neuter status was not given in 38.7% of the clinical studies. The median sample size was 56 (Q1:29; Q3:365) dogs. The presented project revealed that Beagle dogs represent only a small proportion of dogs in veterinary research. Based on the evaluated publications it seems that some relevant attributes of the dogs differ between the specialties. The results, however, show deficits in the reporting of demographic data of the dogs. The demand for improvement of documentation and/or reporting of animal signalment is obvious and should be addressed by authors, reviewers, and journal-editors in the future.