How pet owners choose antiparasitic treatments for their dogs: A discrete choice experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: External and internal parasites can cause significant pathology to pets, posing distress to their owners. Antiparasitic treatment is complex because there are many antiparasitic products and dog owners have a limited understanding of parasiticides. The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics of antiparasitic treatments available at veterinary offices to help veterinarians understand what pet owners value when selecting parasiticides for their dogs. METHODS: Discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology was used. A list of important treatment attributes was developed based on semi-structured interviews with six dog owners with a total of nine dogs and six veterinarians. The questionnaire including 12 choices between pairs of hypothetical products defined according to treatment attributes was developed. The questionnaire was administered to UK dog owners recruited through an internet panel. It was tested in a pilot study with 17 dog owners, and then was completed by 160 dog owners in the main study. RESULTS: The selected treatment attributes were price, spectrum of action, veterinarian recommendation, treatment schedule, mode of administration, and place of obtention. The main analysis showed the first four of these attributes significantly influenced the preferences of dog owners for antiparasitic treatments. The most important factor was spectrum of action; most owners expressed a preference for products treating multiple parasites. The influence of price was comparable to that of spectrum of action. Pet owners were more likely to choose a product recommended by their veterinarian. Willingness-to-pay estimates were £11.22 [€12.68; $15.38] for extending protection from fleas and ticks only to intestinal worm and lungworm and £7.21 [€8.14; $9.87] for recommendation from veterinarian. CONCLUSIONS: A broad spectrum of action, veterinarian recommendation, and price are key drivers for choosing antiparasitic products among dog owners. These results may help veterinarians with recommendations of antiparasitic treatment for pet owners based on the key drivers pet owners value.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".