ArticleVeterinary world2025
Pet owners' perspectives on veterinary biobanking in Latvia: Awareness, motivations, ethical concerns, and willingness to participate.
Article in Veterinary world, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Veterinary biobanking advances translational research, companion animal health, and the ethical reuse of samples. Its success depends on public engagement and the pet owners' willingness to contribute biological samples. However, awareness and attitudes toward veterinary biobanking remain largely unexplored in the Baltic region. This study aimed to assess Latvian pet owners' awareness, willingness to donate, motivations, and concerns regarding veterinary biobanking, and to identify demographic and professional factors influencing participation. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed through social media and veterinary clinics across Latvia between April and May 2025. The questionnaire included 49 items covering awareness, willingness to donate, motivations, concerns, and demographics. Data from 164 pet owners were analyzed using descriptive statistics, the Chi-square tests with Bonferroni correction, and logistic regression. Results: Only 22% of respondents had prior awareness of veterinary biobanks. Despite this, 76% were willing to donate samples if their pet was seriously ill, and 67% even if their pet was healthy. Motivations included altruism (helping other animals), supporting veterinary research, and potential treatment benefits for their own pets. Key concerns centered on confidentiality (91%), the right to withdraw samples (60%), and control of sample use (45%). Professional background was significantly associated with both awareness (p = 0.0004) and willingness to donate (p = 0.0013). Logistic regression confirmed that respondents in medical or veterinary professions were more likely to support donation (odds ratio = 3.31, 95% confidence interval = 1.54-7.12, p = 0.002). No significant associations were found with age, gender, education, or religion. Conclusion: This first Baltic survey reveals that Latvian pet owners strongly support veterinary biobanking despite limited awareness. Altruism and the expected benefits of research drive participation, while ethical expectations regarding confidentiality, consent, and transparency remain crucial. The findings provide a foundation for developing national veterinary biobanking strategies, improving public communication, and integrating Latvia into European One Health and translational research infrastructures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.