Evidence-based medicine in bovine, equine and canine reproduction: quality of current literature.
Abstract: The objective was to evaluate deficits and differences of published literature on reproduction in cattle, horses, and dogs. A literature search was conducted in the databases Medline and Veterinary Science. Approximately five times more articles on clinical bovine reproduction (n = 25 910) were found compared to canine (n = 5 015) and equine (n = 5 090) reproduction. For the evaluation of the literature, a checklist was used. A subset of 600 articles published between 1999 and 2008 was randomly selected. After applying exclusion criteria, a total of 268 trials (86 for cattle, 99 for horses, and 83 for dogs) were evaluated and used for further analysis. For the field of canine and equine reproduction, there were fewer clinical trials with a control group compared to bovine reproduction (cattle 66%, horses 41%, and dogs 41%). For all three species investigated, few publications were identified (4%) with the highest level of evidence, i.e., controlled, randomized, and blinded trials, or meta-analyses. In cattle 33% of the publications were graded adequate to draw sound conclusions; however, only 7 and 11% were graded adequate in dogs and horses, respectively. Therefore, the veterinarian should always assess the quality of information before implementing results into practice to provide best available care for the animals. In conclusion, improvement of the quality of well-designed, conducted and reported clinical trails in animal reproduction is required.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Publication Date: 2011-06-30 PubMed ID: 21719082DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.05.007Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
- Journal Article
Summary
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The research study is an evaluation of the quality and quantity of published literature in the field of bovine, equine, and canine reproduction. The findings reveal that studies on bovine reproduction are significantly more abundant than those on canine and equine reproduction. The research also shows that the quality of these studies is generally low, with few studies meeting the highest level of evidence.
Objective
- The aim of the study was to assess and compare the quality of the existing literature on bovine, equine, and canine reproduction. The goal is to identify potential deficits and differences in the research in these areas.
Methodology
- The authors conducted a literature search in the Medline and Veterinary Science databases to identify articles on clinical bovine, canine, and equine reproduction.
- A random sample of 600 articles, published between 1999 and 2008, was selected for evaluation.
- A checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the selected literature.
- After applying certain exclusion criteria, a total of 268 trials were selected for further analysis. The trials included 86 on cattle, 99 on horses, and 83 on dogs.
Results
- The results show that there were about five times more articles on bovine reproduction compared to canine and equine reproduction.
- There were fewer clinical trials with a control group for canine and equine reproduction compared to bovine reproduction.
- For all three species investigated, only 4% of publications were of the highest level of evidence, i.e., controlled, randomized, blind trials, or meta-analyses.
- In terms of the ability to draw sound conclusions, 33% of bovine reproduction publications were graded adequate, compared to only 7% and 11% for canine and equine publications, respectively.
Conclusion
- The study concludes that there is a need for improvement in the quality of research in animal reproduction. This includes better design, conduct, and reporting of clinical trials.
- Given the low quality of most publications, the authors advise veterinarians to carefully assess the information before implementing the results in practice. The aim should always be to provide the best possible care for the animals based on well-founded knowledge.
Cite This Article
APA
Simoneit C, Heuwieser W, Arlt S.
(2011).
Evidence-based medicine in bovine, equine and canine reproduction: quality of current literature.
Theriogenology, 76(6), 1042-1050.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.05.007 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Clinic for Animal Reproduction, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Cattle / physiology
- Dogs / physiology
- Evidence-Based Medicine
- Female
- Horses / physiology
- Male
- Periodicals as Topic / standards
- Reproduction
Citations
This article has been cited 2 times.- Schulte E, Arlt SP. What Kinds of Dogs Are Used in Clinical and Experimental Research?. Animals (Basel) 2022 Jun 8;12(12).
- Grindlay DJ, Dean RS, Christopher MM, Brennan ML. A survey of the awareness, knowledge, policies and views of veterinary journal Editors-in-Chief on reporting guidelines for publication of research. BMC Vet Res 2014 Jan 10;10:10.
Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists
