Analysing the opinions of UK veterinarians on practice-based research using corpus linguistic and mathematical methods.

The use of corpus linguistic techniques and other related mathematical analyses have rarely, if ever, been applied to qualitative data collected from the veterinary field. The aim of this study was to explore the use of a combination of corpus linguistic analyses and mathematical methods to investigate a free-text questionnaire dataset collected from 3796 UK veterinarians on evidence-based veterinary medicine, specifically, attitudes towards practice-based research (PBR) and improving the veterinary knowledge base. The corpus methods of key word, concordance and collocate analyses were used to identify patterns of meanings within the free text responses. Key words were determined by comparing the questionnaire data with a wordlist from the British National Corpus (representing general English text) using cross-tabs and log-likelihood comparisons to identify words that occur significantly more frequently in the questionnaire data. Concordance and collocation analyses were used to account for the contextual patterns in which such key words occurred, involving qualitative analysis and Mutual Information Analysis (MI3). Additionally, a mathematical topic modelling approach was used as a comparative analysis; words within the free text responses were grouped into topics based on their weight or importance within each response to find starting points for analysis of textual patterns. Results generated from using both qualitative and quantitative techniques identified that the perceived advantages of taking part in PBR centred on the themes of improving knowledge of both individuals and of the veterinary profession as a whole (illustrated by patterns around the words learning, improving, contributing). Time constraints (lack of time, time issues, time commitments) were the main concern of respondents in relation to taking part in PBR. Opinions of what vets could do to improve the veterinary knowledge base focussed on the collecting and sharing of information (record, report), particularly recording and discussing clinical cases (interesting cases), and undertaking relevant continuing professional development activities. The approach employed here demonstrated how corpus linguistics and mathematical methods can help to both identify and contextualise relevant linguistic patterns in the questionnaire responses. The results of the study inform those seeking to coordinate PBR initiatives about the motivators of veterinarians to participate in such initiatives and what concerns need to be addressed. The approach used in this study demonstrates a novel way of analysing textual data in veterinary research.

The Awareness of the International Veterinary Profession of Evidence-Based Veterinary Medicine and Preferred Methods of Training.

Evidence-based veterinary medicine (EVM) is an evolving discipline in veterinary medicine so it is important to periodically "benchmark" opinion about EVM across the profession. An international survey to assess veterinarians' awareness of EVM was conducted. Veterinarians were surveyed via an online questionnaire (all countries) or a postal questionnaire (UK only). Participants were asked whether they had heard of EVM, where they had first heard the term, and their preferences of method for receiving continuing professional development (CPD). There were 6310 respondents, of which 4579 (72.5%) worked in the UK and 5384 (85.3%) were clinicians. Veterinarians that had heard of EVM (n = 5420, 85.9%) were most likely to be clinicians (OR = 4.00; 95% CI: 3.37, 4.75), respondents working in the UK (OR = 1.32; CI: 1.13, 1.54), or respondents with a postgraduate degree or qualification (OR = 1.77; CI: 1.51, 2.08). The most common sources from which respondents had heard of EVM were at vet school or university (n = 1207, 29.8%), via literature (peer-reviewed papers or other publications) (n = 1074, 26.5%), and via CPD courses (n = 564, 13.9%). Most respondents were interested in finding out more about EVM (n = 4256 of 6173, 69%). The preferred methods of CPD were day or evening seminars (n = 2992 of 6017, 49.7%), conferences (n = 1409, 23.4%), and online courses (n = 524, 8.7%), although the order of preference differed slightly between groups. There appears to be substantial awareness of EVM amongst veterinarians internationally. However, it appears that further training in EVM would be welcomed. Preferences on how CPD in general is received differs between groups, so this should be borne in mind by training providers when formulating a strategy for the dissemination of EVM training across the global profession.

International Evidence-Based Medicine Survey of the Veterinary Profession: Information Sources Used by Veterinarians.

Veterinarians are encouraged to use evidence to inform their practice, but it is unknown what resources (e.g. journals, electronic sources) are accessed by them globally. Understanding the key places veterinarians seek information can inform where new clinically relevant evidence should most effectively be placed. An international survey was conducted to gain understanding of how veterinary information is accessed by veterinarians worldwide. There were 2137 useable responses to the questionnaire from veterinarians in 78 countries. The majority of respondents (n = 1835/2137, 85.9%) undertook clinical work and worked in a high income country (n = 1576/1762, 89.4%). Respondents heard about the survey via national veterinary organisations or regulatory bodies (31.5%), online veterinary forums and websites (22.7%), regional, discipline-based or international veterinary organisations (22.7%) or by direct invitation from the researchers or via friends, colleagues or social media (7.6%). Clinicians and non-clinicians reportedly used journals most commonly (65.8%, n = 1207/1835; 75.6%, n = 216/286) followed by electronic resources (58.7%, n = 1077/1835; 55.9%, n = 160/286), respectively. Respondents listed a total of 518 journals and 567 electronic sources that they read. Differences in veterinarian preference for resources in developed, and developing countries, were found. The nominated journals most read were the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (12.7% of nominations) for clinicians and the Veterinary Record (5.7%) for non-clinicians. The most accessed electronic resource reported was the Veterinary Information Network (25.6%) for clinicians and PubMed (7.4%) for non-clinicians. In conclusion, a wide array of journals and electronic resources appear to be accessed by veterinarians worldwide. Veterinary organisations appear to play an important role in global communication and outreach to veterinarians and consideration should be given to how these channels could be best utilised for effective dissemination of key research findings.