“Maybe we should think outside the box?” prioritisation of issues with UK not-for-profit canine health and welfare research funding using Delphi expert consensus and gap analysis

Over fifty participants, who together possessed broad research, veterinary and front-line expertise from across the canine health and welfare sector, contributed to a modified Delphi study to identify the highest priority research topics in UK canine health and welfare, the highest priorities for future research approaches, and the highest priorities for future reform in research processes and infrastructure, through group consensus. Further analysis also compared the prioritisation of selected research topics to the actual levels of research funding they previously received, through comparison with historical data. Most of the identified highest priority issues relating to canine health and welfare and its research concerned various aspects of the human-canine relationship, such as ownership or behavioural issues. Participants strongly emphasised the complexity of interrelated factors that impact the welfare of both dogs and people. Research topics identified as previously 'most underfunded' all concerned real-world canine welfare issues, particularly emphasising the breeding and supply of dogs. A supplementary analysis of historical research funding (2012-2022) for common chronic disorders in primary care practice, another identified highest priority topic, identified periodontal disease, anal sac disorders, overgrown nails and patellar luxation as the 'most underfunded' conditions. Most of the identified highest priority research approaches and methodologies concerned real-world design and execution aspects of canine health and welfare research, such as impact and engagement, with a strong focus on research investigating the human factors in canine welfare. Aspects of research funding infrastructure that were considered highest priority for future change mostly concerned increased transparency of funding processes and increased collaboration between stakeholder groups throughout the funding sector, which was strongly supported. Overall, these findings emphasise the importance of considering and including human factors and real-world impact, where appropriate, as key elements for optimising the relevance of canine health and welfare research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2024-12-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0313735
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Human-Animal Interaction Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

“Maybe we should think outside the box?” prioritisation of issues with UK not-for-profit canine health and welfare research funding using Delphi expert consensus and gap analysis

Dan Gerard O'Neill, Alison M. Skipper, Rowena M. A. Packer
4 citations
PLoS ONE
Human-Animal Interaction Studies
2.20
article

“Maybe we should think outside the box?” prioritisation of issues with UK not-for-profit canine health and welfare research funding using Delphi expert consensus and gap analysis

Dan Gerard O'Neill, Alison M. Skipper, Rowena M. A. Packer
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Over fifty participants, who together possessed broad research, veterinary and front-line expertise from across the canine health and welfare sector, contributed to a modified Delphi study to identify the highest priority research topics in UK canine health and welfare, the highest priorities for future research approaches, and the highest priorities for future reform in research processes and infrastructure, through group consensus. Further analysis also compared the prioritisation of selected research topics to the actual levels of research funding they previously received, through comparison with historical data. Most of the identified highest priority issues relating to canine health and welfare and its research concerned various aspects of the human-canine relationship, such as ownership or behavioural issues. Participants strongly emphasised the complexity of interrelated factors that impact the welfare of both dogs and people. Research topics identified as previously 'most underfunded' all concerned real-world canine welfare issues, particularly emphasising the breeding and supply of dogs. A supplementary analysis of historical research funding (2012-2022) for common chronic disorders in primary care practice, another identified highest priority topic, identified periodontal disease, anal sac disorders, overgrown nails and patellar luxation as the 'most underfunded' conditions. Most of the identified highest priority research approaches and methodologies concerned real-world design and execution aspects of canine health and welfare research, such as impact and engagement, with a strong focus on research investigating the human factors in canine welfare. Aspects of research funding infrastructure that were considered highest priority for future change mostly concerned increased transparency of funding processes and increased collaboration between stakeholder groups throughout the funding sector, which was strongly supported. Overall, these findings emphasise the importance of considering and including human factors and real-world impact, where appropriate, as key elements for optimising the relevance of canine health and welfare research.

PLoS ONEVol. 19(12)
Royal Veterinary College (GB)
Petplan Charitable Trust, Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Wellcome Trust, Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, WALTHAM Foundation, Dogs Trust, Royal Veterinary College, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Partnerships for the goals, Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Human-Animal Interaction Studies
2.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.