MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402147419

When veterinarians treat plus-sized pets: Insights for veterinary practice.

2024· article· en· W4402147419 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Valli-Laurente Fraser-Celin, Amberlee Boulton, Kathleen Keil, Melanie Rock, Cindy L. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchRoyal CaninUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsVeterinary medicinePet therapyAnimal welfareMedicineBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Obesity of companion animals in Canada is becoming a problem in veterinary practice. Cats and dogs, in particular, are increasingly overweight. However, prevention and treatment present challenges. Challenges in treating pet obesity, such as client nonadherence and animal welfare issues arising from obesity, also affect the well-being of veterinarians - especially given the coincident high rates of burnout and compassion fatigue experienced in the profession. Objective: This study investigated how practicing veterinarians perceive the treatment of overweight companion animals and how treating obese pets affects well-being of veterinarians. Animals and procedure: We recruited veterinarians who routinely treat companion animals in private practice to participate in focus group interviews. We also interviewed veterinarians who could not attend the focus group sessions, yet still wished to contribute. Through thematic data analysis, we generated key themes that illustrated how treating obese pets negatively affects veterinarian well-being. Results: Eighteen companion animal veterinarians contributed to this study. We generated 3 themes from the analysis that illustrate negative effects of treating obese pets on veterinarian well-being: i) negative feelings such as frustration and sadness associated with treating obese pets; ii) owners' lack of comprehension of the effects of obesity on pets, including early euthanasia; and iii) client nonadherence regarding treatment. Conclusion and clinical relevance: This study contributes to the veterinary literature on companion animal obesity by focusing on how treating pet obesity affects veterinarian well-being, especially given high rates of burnout and compassion fatigue in the profession. As pet obesity increases in society, obesity prevention and treatment is becoming central to companion animal veterinary practice. Our findings suggest that veterinarian well-being is negatively affected in connection with companion animal obesity. We recommend relationship-centered communication, increased nutritional expertise, and a focus on wellness in the workplace to improve veterinarian well-being while treating pet obesity.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207