30
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      ‘It’s more emotionally based’: Prince Edward Island horse owner perspectives of horse weight management

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Horse obesity is a growing concern that can result in negative welfare. The role horse owners play in horse weight management is not well understood. This study aimed to: (1) explore the attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions of owners with overweight or obese horses regarding their horses’ weight; and (2) understand the motivators and barriers for owners to implement, improve and maintain weight management-related strategies. A semi-structured interview guide based on the Theoretical Domains Framework was developed. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 owners in Prince Edward Island, Canada whose horse(s) were previously classified as overweight or obese by a veterinarian. Interviews were analysed using template analysis, organising patterns in the data into a codebook and overarching themes. Owners believed horse weight management was important, however, their perceived complexity of the issue made the implementation of the weight management practices difficult. Owners held conflicting perceptions, viewing overweight horses as well cared for, yet recognised these horses were at increased risk for negative health outcomes. Ultimately, participants felt emotionally torn about compromising their horse’s mental well-being to address weight issues. Owners considered the practicality of weight-management strategies, the strategies’ effectiveness, and whether recommended strategies aligned with their beliefs regarding good horse care practices. Knowledge was embedded into owners’ understanding of horse weight, however, some highlighted that traditional knowledge dominates the equine industry hindering systemic industry change. Increased understanding of the effectiveness and impacts of weight management strategies on horses and fostering a society that recognises and accepts horses within a healthy weight range are warranted.

          Related collections

          Most cited references81

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization

          Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Thematic Analysis

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems

              Background Implementing new practices requires changes in the behaviour of relevant actors, and this is facilitated by understanding of the determinants of current and desired behaviours. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was developed by a collaboration of behavioural scientists and implementation researchers who identified theories relevant to implementation and grouped constructs from these theories into domains. The collaboration aimed to provide a comprehensive, theory-informed approach to identify determinants of behaviour. The first version was published in 2005, and a subsequent version following a validation exercise was published in 2012. This guide offers practical guidance for those who wish to apply the TDF to assess implementation problems and support intervention design. It presents a brief rationale for using a theoretical approach to investigate and address implementation problems, summarises the TDF and its development, and describes how to apply the TDF to achieve implementation objectives. Examples from the implementation research literature are presented to illustrate relevant methods and practical considerations. Methods Researchers from Canada, the UK and Australia attended a 3-day meeting in December 2012 to build an international collaboration among researchers and decision-makers interested in the advancing use of the TDF. The participants were experienced in using the TDF to assess implementation problems, design interventions, and/or understand change processes. This guide is an output of the meeting and also draws on the authors’ collective experience. Examples from the implementation research literature judged by authors to be representative of specific applications of the TDF are included in this guide. Results We explain and illustrate methods, with a focus on qualitative approaches, for selecting and specifying target behaviours key to implementation, selecting the study design, deciding the sampling strategy, developing study materials, collecting and analysing data, and reporting findings of TDF-based studies. Areas for development include methods for triangulating data, e.g. from interviews, questionnaires and observation and methods for designing interventions based on TDF-based problem analysis. Conclusions We offer this guide to the implementation community to assist in the application of the TDF to achieve implementation objectives. Benefits of using the TDF include the provision of a theoretical basis for implementation studies, good coverage of potential reasons for slow diffusion of evidence into practice and a method for progressing from theory-based investigation to intervention. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Journal
                Anim Welf
                Anim Welf
                AWF
                Animal Welfare
                Cambridge University Press (Cambridge, UK )
                0962-7286
                2054-1538
                2024
                11 March 2024
                : 33
                : e14
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Department of Health Management, Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island , Charlottetown, PE C1A 4P3, Canada
                [ 2 ]Department of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia , Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
                [ 3 ]Department of Animal Biosciences, University of Guelph , Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
                [ 4 ]Campbell Centre for the Study of Animal Welfare, University of Guelph , Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
                [ 5 ]Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Prince Edward Island , Charlottetown, PE C1A 4P3, Canada
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Megan Ross; Email: mmross10995@ 123456upei.ca

                Author contributions: Conceptualisation: MR, KP, KM, CR; Data curation: MR; Formal analysis: MR, KP, ECN, EM, KM, CR; Methodology: CR, MR, JM; Funding acquisition: CR, KP, JM; Resources: CR; Supervision: CR, KP; Visualisation: MR; Writing (original draft): MR, KP, ECN, KM, CR; Writing (review & editing): MR, KP, ECN, EM, KM, JM, CR.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1457-5318
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5877-2431
                https://orcid.org/0009-0009-8847-959X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1992-6471
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9462-4150
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9610-7069
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7349-5241
                Article
                S0962728624000095
                10.1017/awf.2024.9
                10951667
                38510426
                ce1592d5-903a-4e78-a872-d0d7ac9533d2
                © The Author(s) 2024

                This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.

                History
                : 31 July 2023
                : 25 October 2023
                : 02 January 2024
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 1, References: 84, Pages: 11
                Funding
                Funded by: Canadian Agricultural Partnership
                Funded by: Canada Research Chairs, doi http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001804;
                Funded by: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, doi http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000155;
                Funded by: Canada Foundation for Innovation, doi http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000196;
                Funded by: Sir James Dunn Animal Welfare Centre
                Categories
                Research Article

                animal welfare,behaviour change,decision-making,phenomenology,owner perspectives,public perception

                Comments

                Comment on this article