Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div> The importation of rescue dogs has become an increasingly common occurrence in recent years, often involving industrialized countries as the ultimate destination. However, international dog rescue activities have attracted considerable criticism from the veterinary community and the public due to the associated zoonotic disease and public health risks, as well as the potential poor behaviour of international rescue dogs. The Government of Canada has also recently placed a temporary suspension on all commercial dog imports from non-rabies free countries due to the growing concerns of the zoonotic disease risks. To understand the perspectives and experiences of stakeholders involved in dog import activities in Canada, we interviewed nine members in leadership positions of Canadian-based international dog rescue organizations. Thematic analysis of interview dialogue yielded three themes: 1) <i>Motive</i>, which described the reason behind participants’ involvement in international dog rescue; 2) <i>Challenge</i>, which described the major difficulties faced in participants’ dog rescue work; 3) <i>Duty</i>, which described participants’ beliefs on responsible dog rescue practices. Members of international dog rescue organizations described being driven by strong desires to provide animal and humanitarian aid. However, local dog rescue efforts were constrained by logistical and societal barriers unique to the Canadian context. Additionally, the current study revealed both similarities and differences in occupational experiences between international dog rescue organizations and other animal care professions. Specifically, difficulties with the emotional burden associated with caregiving professions was also present within dog rescue work. However, international dog rescue members also experienced additional challenges due to the stigma surrounding international dog rescue operations. Further research on attitudes held by other stakeholders involved in dog import activities, as well as members of Canadian communities needing dog rescue aid may provide meaningful inputs on how to better support and facilitate local and international dog rescue efforts. </div>
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.518 | 0.071 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".