Perceptions and opinions of pet owners in the<scp>U</scp>nited<scp>S</scp>ates about surgery, pain management, and anesthesia in dogs and cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate pet owners' perceptions and understanding of surgical pain, perioperative pain management, and anesthesia. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective owner survey. SAMPLE POPULATION: Eight veterinary hospitals each provided 200 surveys for distribution to pet owners. METHODS: A survey evaluated owners' perceptions and opinions related to surgical pain, perioperative pain management, anesthesia in dogs and cats, and owner demographics (sex, age, education, employment, previous surgical experience, and pet ownership) in 8 regions of the United States (Alaska, Florida, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Oregon, Ohio, Texas, Washington, DC). Effects of demographics on survey questions were analyzed by using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. Descriptive statistics and frequency distributions were calculated when applicable. RESULTS: 948/1600 (59.25%) of distributed questionnaires were completed. Owners reported that analgesics were "always needed" more often for surgical procedures than medical conditions. Knowing what to expect during recovery (99%), being informed of procedures and risks (98%), adequate pain management (98%), and having a board-certified anesthesiologist perform anesthesia (94%) were considered "important" or "very important" by owners. The majority of owners agreed that pain affects quality of life (81%), interactions with family and pets (73%), and that declawing is a painful procedure (59%). Older respondents (>46 years), women, owners who have had previous surgery or who have pets that have had previous surgery, and those in health care professions have a better understanding of pain but also expect effective client communication. CONCLUSION: Improving our understanding of pet owners' perceptions and knowledge related to anesthesia, surgery, and pain may lead to improved client education, satisfaction, and compliance with administration of analgesics.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".