MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224098382 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2022.857634

Reasons for Guardian-Relinquishment of Dogs to Shelters: Animal and Regional Predictors in British Columbia, Canada

2022· article· en· W4224098382 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Bailey H. Eagan, Emilia Gordon, Alexandra Protopopova

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsPositive Living Society of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnimal welfareGuardianHUBzeroVeterinary medicineGeographyMedicinePet therapyBiologyPolitical scienceLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dogs are relinquished to animal shelters for animal-related or guardian-related reasons. Understanding what drives relinquishment patterns is essential for informing intervention opportunities to keep animals with their guardians. Whereas, overall reasons for relinquishment in a given shelter system have been well explored, analysis of human and animal predictors of relinquishing for a specific reason has not been previously attempted. We used characteristics of relinquishment including year, population of the relinquishing guardian's region, health status of the dog, breed, age group, weight, and sex to predict reasons for dog relinquishment to British Columbia (BC) Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) shelters across BC between 2008 and 2019 ( n = 32,081). Relinquishment trends for puppies and adult dogs were also viewed and described. From 2008–2019, the proportion of dogs relinquished relative to total intake remained consistent (range: 31–35%). Primary reasons reported by guardians were having too many dogs (19%), housing issues (17%), personal issues (15%), financial issues (10%), dog behavior (10%), and guardian health (8%). Over years, an increasing proportion of dogs were relinquished for the reason “too many” (OR = 1.16, 95% CI, 1.10–1.23, p < 0.001) and “behavior” (OR = 1.34, 95% CI, 1.26–1.43, p < 0.001), while a decreasing proportion were relinquished due to financial problems (OR = 0.94, 95% CI, 0.88–1.00, p = 0.047). Being a puppy, mixed breed, small, and from a small or medium population center predicted the reason “too many.” Being a senior, Healthy, or from a medium or large population center predicted the reason “housing issues.” Being a non-puppy, Healthy dog in a large population center predicted the reason “personal issues.” Being a puppy, non-Healthy, female, and from a large population center predicted the reason “financial issues.” Being a larger young adult or adult and Healthy predicted the reason “dog behavior.” Being an adult or senior small dog from a small population center predicted the reason “guardian health.” Particularly promising region-specific intervention opportunities include efforts to prevent too many animals in small population centers, improvement of pet-inclusive housing in large population centers, and providing animal care support in large population centers. Accessible veterinary services, including low-cost or subsidized care, likely benefit dog retention across BC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Veterinary ScienceSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207