Time filter

Source Type

Schaumburg, IL, United States

Sargeant J.M.,University of Guelph | O'Connor A.M.,Iowa State University | Gardner I.A.,University of California at Davis | Dickson J.S.,Iowa State University | And 6 more authors.
Zoonoses and Public Health | Year: 2010

Concerns about the completeness and accuracy of reporting of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and the impact of poor reporting on decision making have been documented in the medical field over the past several decades. Experience from RCTs in human medicine would suggest that failure to report critical trial features can be associated with biased estimated effect measures, and there is evidence to suggest that similar biases occur in RCTs conducted in livestock populations. In response to these concerns, standardized guidelines for reporting RCTs were developed and implemented in human medicine. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement was first published in 1996, with a revised edition published in 2001. The CONSORT statement consists of a 22-item checklist for reporting a RCT and a flow diagram to follow the number of participants at each stage of a trial. An explanation and elaboration document not only defines and discusses the importance of each of the items, but also provides examples of how this information could be supplied in a publication. Differences between human and livestock populations necessitate modifications to the CONSORT statement to maximize its usefulness for RCTs involving livestock. These have been addressed in an extension of the CONSORT statement titled the REFLECT statement: Methods and processes of creating reporting guidelines for randomized control trials for livestock and food safety. The modifications made for livestock trials specifically addressed the common use of group housing and group allocation to intervention in livestock studies; the use of deliberate challenge models in some trials and the common use of non-clinical outcomes, such as contamination with a foodborne pathogen. In addition, the REFLECT statement for RCTs in livestock populations proposed specific terms or further clarified terms as they pertained to livestock studies. © 2010 Blackwell Verlag GmbH. Source

O'Connor A.M.,Iowa State University | Sargeant J.M.,Center for Public Health and Zoonoses | Gardner I.A.,University of California at Davis | Dickson J.S.,Iowa State University | And 16 more authors.
Preventive Veterinary Medicine | Year: 2010

The conduct of randomized controlled trials in livestock with production, health, and food-safety outcomes presents unique challenges that may not be adequately reported in trial reports. The objective of this project was to modify the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to reflect the unique aspects of reporting these livestock trials. A two-day consensus meeting was held on November 18-19, 2008 in Chicago, IL, United States of America, to achieve the objective. Prior to the meeting, a Web-based survey was conducted to identify issues for discussion. The 24 attendees were biostatisticians, epidemiologists, food-safety researchers, livestock-production specialists, journal editors, assistant editors, and associate editors. Prior to the meeting, the attendees completed a Web-based survey indicating which CONSORT statement items may need to be modified to address unique issues for livestock trials. The consensus meeting resulted in the production of the REFLECT (Reporting Guidelines For Randomized Control Trials) statement for livestock and food safety (LFS) and 22-item checklist. Fourteen items were modified from the CONSORT checklist, and an additional sub-item was proposed to address challenge trials. The REFLECT statement proposes new terminology, more consistent with common usage in livestock production, to describe study subjects. Evidence was not always available to support modification to or inclusion of an item. The use of the REFLECT statement, which addresses issues unique to livestock trials, should improve the quality of reporting and design for trials reporting production, health, and food-safety outcomes. © 2009 A.M. O'Connor. Source

Sabin E.A.,Education and Research Division | DeHaven W.R.,American Veterinary Medical Association
OIE Revue Scientifique et Technique | Year: 2012

Veterinary education serves as the foundation on which a country can build effective Veterinary Services (VS). In addition, an appropriately well-educated animal health workforce will be better poised to actively participate in and advance good governance practices. Good governance, in turn, will lead to improved animal and veterinary public heath infrastructures and help advance economic development across the globe. A crucial first step in establishing a strong educational foundation is to define minimum competencies for both public-and private-practice veterinarians to perform veterinary service tasks. Defining minimum competencies will also assist veterinary education establishments (VEEs) in developing and implementing curricula to allow graduates to achieve those competencies. Incorporating veterinary educational prerequisites and requirements into governance documents that regulate VS will help to ensure that those who deliver VS have an adequate knowledge and skills base to do so. Public-private partnerships may be particularly effective in designing and implementing curricula that address defined minimum competencies and assure the quality of VEEs. Through these partnerships, a system of continuous quality improvement is established that embodies the qualities essential to good governance practices. Such practices will ultimately strengthen national VS, better protect animal and public health, and ensure food security. Source

Patterson-Kane E.,American Veterinary Medical Association
Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science | Year: 2010

Researchers seem to be stuck reiterating the now-familiar argument that barren boxes are bad for welfare and that rodents are due ethical consideration. But the prerequisites for real progress are new kinds of arguments, new types of data, and removal of very real practical and cultural obstacles to implementation of meaningful enrichment. We must discover what we have to do to effectively change the practices of people who have care and control of rodents in the laboratory, not just husbandry staff but those who develop the institution's protocols, job descriptions, and resourcing. Researchers are inventers of information, and like any inventor we should experience no satisfaction until our ideas are fully implemented-and we must be an active participant in that process. If we are asking animal caretakers to make deep, paradigmatic changes in their thinking, it is imperative that we in turn develop an emotionally positive understanding of areas important to them. For unless the welfare advocates truly understand the issues such as budgets, biosecurity, and branding, why should the people responsible for those subjects listen to us? © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Source

American Veterinary Medical Association | Date: 2015-07-04

Downloadable electronic publications in the nature of brochures related to various aspects of veterinary medicine. Printed publications, namely, brochures, booklets, newsletters, and pamphlets related to various aspects of veterinary medicine. Clothing, namely, t-shirts, shirts, short-sleeved shirts, long-sleeved shirts, polo shirts, sweaters, jackets, and hats. Association services, namely, promoting the interests, goals and objectives of the veterinary medical community through programs, publications, and communications in the field of veterinary science and medicine; Providing a website to promote the interests, goals and objectives of the veterinary medical community through programs, publications, and communications in the field of veterinary science and medicine.

Discover hidden collaborations