165 research outputs found
Researcher, research thyself? Mapping the landscape of canine health and welfare research funding provided by UK not-for-profit organisations from 2012–2022
Get PDFBackground Research into canine health and welfare is supported by Government, charitable and private UK funding organisations. However, there is no current overall visibility or coordination of these funding activities, potentially compromising optimal distribution of limited resources. This study aimed to survey UK canine health and welfare funding by not-for-profit funders between 2012 and 2022, providing a novel baseline analysis to inform future sector stakeholder priorities. Results Funding data were collected from 10 wide-scope funders (UK Government funding councils and medical charities), 18 animal-directed funders (organisations specifically concerned with animal health and welfare) and 81 breed community groups. These 109 UK funders together provided traceable canine-relevant funding of £57.8 million during the surveyed period, comprising 684 individual grant awards supporting over 500 separate research projects. Wide-scope funders contributed £41.2 million (71.2% of total funding); animal-directed organisations, £16.3 million (28.1% of total funding); and breed-specific groups, £370K (0.6% of total funding). Individual grants ranged from £2.3 million to £300. Funding patterns varied between sectors. Animal-directed funders provided £14.7 million of canine-relevant research funding that foregrounded the dog, 73% of all such funding; wide-scope funders provided £17.5 million of canine-relevant One Health research funding, 97% of all such funding. Customised metrics developed for this study assessed the ‘benefit to the dog’ and ‘pathway to impact’ of individual research projects. Overall, studies supported by animal-directed funders achieved significantly higher ‘benefit to the dog’ scores (Mann-Whitney U = 45235, p<0.001) and ‘pathway to impact’ scores (Mann-Whitney U = 43506.5, p<0.001) than those supported by wide-scope funders. Conclusion The landscape of UK not-for-profit funding of canine health and welfare research is complex, with considerable variation between providers. Although wide-scope funders provide the majority of overall canine-relevant research funding, animal-directed funders provide the majority of canine-focused funding and support research with greater direct impact on canine welfare. Visibility of past funding patterns will enable stakeholders in this sector to make more informed decisions about future research. Definitions To increase clarity, certain words and phrases are used in specific ways within the context of this paper. Animal-directed funders—Charities and other funding organisations whose remit primarily concerns animals or veterinary work Canine-focused research—Investigations where the primary purpose is to advance understandings of canine health and/or welfare Canine-relevant research—All research that is framed as advancing understandings of canine health and/or welfare as a primary or subsidiary purpose Institution—Refers to universities and other centres where research is carried out Organisation—Refers to funding bodies, including research councils, charities and other groups Research grant—A single funding event originating from one or more funders Research project—A cohesive piece of research concerning a particular topic; may involve multiple researchers and/or multiple research grants, in series or in parallel Wide-scope funders—Large organisations whose remit does not primarily concern animals, i.e. (in this dataset) UKRI councils and the Wellcome Trus
Is it now time to iron out the wrinkles? Health of Shar Pei dogs under primary veterinary care in the UK
Get PDFMoving from information and collaboration to action: report from the 3rd International Dog Health Workshop, Paris in April 2017
Get PDFAbstract Background Breed-related health problems in dogs have received increased focus over the last decade. Responsibility for causing and/or solving these problems has been variously directed towards dog breeders and kennel clubs, the veterinary profession, welfare scientists, owners, regulators, insurance companies and the media. In reality, all these stakeholders are likely to share some responsibility and optimal progress on resolving these challenges requires all key stakeholders to work together. The International Partnership for Dogs (IPFD), together with an alternating host organization, holds biennial meetings called the International Dog Health Workshops (IDHW). The Société Centrale Canine (French Kennel Club) hosted the 3rd IDHW, in Paris, in April, 2017. These meetings bring together a wide range of stakeholders in dog health, science and welfare to improve international sharing of information and resources, to provide a forum for ongoing collaboration, and to identify specific needs and actions to improve health, well-being and welfare in dogs. Results The workshop included 140 participants from 23 countries and was structured around six important issues facing those who work to improve dog health. These included individualized breed-specific strategies for health and breeding, extreme conformations, education and communication in relation to antimicrobial resistance, behavior and welfare, genetic testing and population-based evidence. A number of exciting actions were agreed during the meeting. These included setting up working groups to create tools to help breed clubs accelerate the implementation of breed-health strategies, review aspects of extreme conformation and share useful information on behavior. The meeting also heralded the development of an online resource of relevant information describing quality measures for DNA testing. A demand for more and better data and evidence was a recurring message stressed across all themes. Conclusions The meeting confirmed the benefits from inclusion of a diverse range of stakeholders who all play relevant and collaborative parts to improve future canine health. Firm actions were set for progress towards improving breed-related welfare. The next international workshop will be in the UK in 2019 and will be organized by the UK Kennel Club
Epilepsy beyond seizures: a review of the impact of epilepsy and its comorbidities on health‐related quality of life in dogs
No full text
Challenges in the business models of creative professional service firms
No full textRecent studies have shown that professionals in the built environment need new or improved business strategies to survive in increasingly dynamic and competitive environments. To gain insight into how professional businesses can be successfully reshaped, a profound understanding of their business models is necessary. So far, business model research in project-based organisations has focused on large companies that are primarily profit-oriented. Work that addresses the business challenges of small, creative service firms is extremely limited. This study aims to develop knowledge around the business models of architectural firms by focusing on their value propositions, value creation and value capture. Iterating between business model literature and empirical data from 41 semi-structured interviews with Dutch architects and clients, architectural firms’ business models were systematically examined regarding theirconfigurations and outcomes. This resulted in an overview of key business model components, their interrelationships and accompanying challenges for architectural firms. The study contributes to theory and practice by the development of a strategic decision making framework that specifically addresses the business model challenges of small creative service firms. The framework helps practitioners to enhance their business strategies and to develop new or improved business models with increased benefits.Design & Construction ManagementManagement in the Built Environmen
Knowledge of UK Residents About Importing Puppies from EU Countries
No full textThe number of puppies imported to the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU) is increasing, as are concerns about the legality, welfare and potential disease risks associated with their trade. This study aimed to use an online survey to collect questionnaire data from UK residents about their awareness and knowledge of EU Pet Passports, illegal puppy importation, and dog-borne exotic diseases and the risks they might pose to UK-resident dogs and people. Valid responses were collected from n = 7184 UK residents, mainly current dog owners. We identified substantial knowledge gaps relating to EU Pet Passports, how puppies might be moved across Europe, and the legal age of importation. Awareness of exotic diseases was poor; knowledge about the risks they posed was even poorer, particularly in relation to dog–human transmission. With some respondents not even being confident that they had heard of rabies, there is substantial work to do to ensure that the UK canine and human populations remain safe in the face of significant welfare and exotic disease threats. These knowledge deficits may facilitate the burgeoning illegal trade in puppies across the EU. Legal change may be required to prevent consumers from unintentionally supporting poor welfare sources of puppies
Nothing Could Put Me Off: Assessing the Prevalence and Risk Factors for Perceptual Barriers to Improving the Welfare of Brachycephalic Dogs
No full textThe popularity of brachycephalic dogs has increased worldwide despite growing evidence of their profound health and welfare issues, largely as a result of their extreme conformation. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors for known perceptual barriers to improving their welfare. An online survey of n = 2006 UK dog owners was conducted, including owners of non-brachycephalic (non-BC; n = 964), mild-moderate brachycephalic (M-BC; n = 706), and extreme brachycephalic (E-BC; n = 336) dogs. The survey explored contemporary knowledge and attitudes toward brachycephalic dogs, with multivariable statistical analyses identifying risk factors for normalisation of brachycephaly-related abnormalities, preference for flat faces and ‘laziness’ in dogs, and self-reported intractability to being deterred from buying a brachycephalic breed. Almost 1 in 7 E-BC owners considered that there was ‘nothing’ that could dissuade them from buying a brachycephalic dog, predicted by a strong preference for flat faces as a highly desirable aesthetic characteristic and beliefs that brachycephaly did not negatively impact lifespan. E-BC owners were most likely to consider flat faces a highly desirable aesthetic characteristic, predicted by highly valuing ‘laziness’ as a behavioural characteristic. Preference for ‘laziness’ as a behavioural characteristic was predicted by low levels of pre-purchase research and aesthetic preferences (e.g., flat faces, large size). High levels of normalisation of brachycephaly-related abnormalities were observed across all ownership groups, particularly for clinical signs related to exercise intolerance, with these beliefs predicted by deficits in dog acquisition behaviours and knowledge, and intractability from being deterred from purchasing a flat-faced dog. These findings highlight the pervasiveness of perceptual barriers that inhibit campaigning regarding brachycephaly and the need for targeted interventions to address misconceptions (e.g., ‘myth busting’ laziness as a positive trait), while being mindful of the heterogeneity of beliefs within the brachycephalic-owning population, particularly the intractable sub-population to whom shifting preferences away from flat-faced conformations may prove impossible without stronger measures, e.g., legislative change
Calculation of Proportional muzzle length ratio (M%).
No full textCranial length is defined as the horizon-line distance (mm) from the dorsal tip of the nose to the occipital protuberance (b’-c). Muzzle length is the horizon-line distance (mm) from the dorsal tip of nose to the nasal stop (b’-b). In the event that the dorsal tip of the nose is in line with the nasal stop a zero value is assigned. For this picture M% = 7.89% ([muzzle length 6mm / cranial length 76mm] *100). Note for readers: measurements will differ based on the size of viewed image.</p
- …
