Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Apr 16:1:2.
doi: 10.1186/2052-6687-1-2. eCollection 2014.

Approaches to canine health surveillance

Affiliations
Review

Approaches to canine health surveillance

Dan G O'Neill et al. Canine Genet Epidemiol. .

Abstract

Effective canine health surveillance systems can be used to monitor disease in the general population, prioritise disorders for strategic control and focus clinical research, and to evaluate the success of these measures. The key attributes for optimal data collection systems that support canine disease surveillance are representativeness of the general population, validity of disorder data and sustainability. Limitations in these areas present as selection bias, misclassification bias and discontinuation of the system respectively. Canine health data sources are reviewed to identify their strengths and weaknesses for supporting effective canine health surveillance. Insurance data benefit from large and well-defined denominator populations but are limited by selection bias relating to the clinical events claimed and animals covered. Veterinary referral clinical data offer good reliability for diagnoses but are limited by referral bias for the disorders and animals included. Primary-care practice data have the advantage of excellent representation of the general dog population and recording at the point of care by veterinary professionals but may encounter misclassification problems and technical difficulties related to management and analysis of large datasets. Questionnaire surveys offer speed and low cost but may suffer from low response rates, poor data validation, recall bias and ill-defined denominator population information. Canine health scheme data benefit from well-characterised disorder and animal data but reflect selection bias during the voluntary submissions process. Formal UK passive surveillance systems are limited by chronic under-reporting and selection bias. It is concluded that active collection systems using secondary health data provide the optimal resource for canine health surveillance.

Keywords: Cancer registry; Canine; Data source; Disorder; Epidemiology; Health scheme; Insurance; Primary-care practice; Questionnaire; Referral practice; Surveillance.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Thrusfield M. Veterinary Epidemiology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing; 2007. p. 610.
    1. Salman MD. Animal disease surveillance and survey systems, methods and applications. Ames Iowa: Iowa State Press, Blackwell; 2003.
    1. Salman MD. Surveillance tools and strategies for animal diseases in a shifting climate context. Animal health research reviews. 2013. - PubMed
    1. Doherr MG, Audigé L. Monitoring and surveillance for rare health-related events, a review from the veterinary perspective. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological sciences. 2001;356:1097–1106. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2001.0898. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lund EM, Armstrong PJ, Kirk CA, Kolar LM, Klausner JS. Health status and population characteristics of dogs and cats examined at private veterinary practices in the United States. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1999;214:1336–1341. - PubMed