Dog Ownership, Physical Activity, and Health-Related Quality of Life in Veterinary Students: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary objective of this cross-sectional study was to examine the relationship between dog ownership and physical activity in veterinary students. The secondary objective was to gain an understanding of veterinary students' health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and whether dog ownership and/or physical activity were associated with HRQOL measures. Veterinary students were invited to complete surveys between September and November 2015. The primary outcome for multivariate analyses was self-reported physical activity. Bivariate analyses and descriptive statistics were performed to assess student HRQOL. The survey response rate was 33% (152/460). Self-efficacy to exercise (p<.001, OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.46-3.44) and dog ownership (p=.01, OR 3.38, 95% CI 1.31-8.71) independently predicted meeting physical activity guidelines when controlling for other variables. About two thirds of respondents met physical activity guidelines. Veterinary students had significantly worse self-reported mental health scores when compared to both national and state averages. Neither dog ownership nor meeting physical activity guidelines were significantly associated with measures of HRQOL. The poor mental health status of veterinary students remains a significant issue for the profession to address. Longitudinal studies are needed that examine the relationship between physical activity and mental health outcomes in this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".