Clinical Animal Behaviour: Paradigms, Problems and Practice

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Effective and ethical management of problem animal behaviour requires the translation of scientific research into practice. However, to do this we must appreciate different scientific perspectives and their limitations. There are serious limitations to the application of population level effects to the care of the individual. Factors such as p-values relating to difference, or lack there of, appear to be frequently misunderstood and may be of less value than widely appreciated. Clinical significance can be very different to statistical significance. There is also a growing concern over the way in which an approach supposedly based on evidence medicine is being applied to treatment recommendations. This is in danger of creating unhelpful biases that can undermine the delivery of personalized care which is at the heart of clinical animal behaviour practice. In order to address this, increased open access and data-sharing is to be encouraged. Evidence from scientific studies needs to be combined with critical reflection of its relevance on a case by case basis by clinicians. Accordingly it is imperative that they have a high level of scientific literacy. ABSTRACT: Both the public and clinicians are interested in the application of scientific knowledge concerning problem animal behaviour and its treatment. However, in order to do this effectively it is essential that individuals have not only scientific literacy but also an appreciation of philosophical concepts underpinning a particular approach and their practical implications on the knowledge generated as a result. This paper highlights several common misunderstandings and biases associated with different scientific perspectives relevant to clinical animal behaviour and their consequences for how we determine what may be a useful treatment for a given patient. In addition to more reflective evaluation of results, there is a need for researchers to report more information of value to clinicians; such as relevant treatment outcomes, effect sizes, population characteristics. Clinicians must also appreciate the limitations of population level study results to a given case. These challenges can however be overcome with the careful critical reflection using the scientific principles and caveats described.