Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/121146
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMcGreevy, P.-
dc.contributor.authorMasters, S.-
dc.contributor.authorRichards, L.-
dc.contributor.authorSoares Magalhaes, R.J.-
dc.contributor.authorPeaston, A.-
dc.contributor.authorCombs, M.-
dc.contributor.authorIrwin, P.J.-
dc.contributor.authorLloyd, J.-
dc.contributor.authorCroton, C.-
dc.contributor.authorWylie, C.-
dc.contributor.authorWilson, B.-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.citationAnimals, 2019; 9(7):423-1-423-10-
dc.identifier.issn2076-2615-
dc.identifier.issn2076-2615-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/121146-
dc.description.abstractIn Australia, compulsory microchipping legislation requires that animals are microchipped before sale or prior to 3 months in the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria, and by 6 months in Western Australia and Tasmania. Describing the implementation of microchipping in animals allows the data guardians to identify individual animals presenting to differing veterinary practices over their lifetimes, and to evaluate compliance with legislation. VetCompass Australia (VCA) collates electronic patient records from primary care veterinary practices into a database for epidemiological studies. VCA is the largest companion animal clinical data repository of its kind in Australia, and is therefore the ideal resource to analyse microchip data as a permanent unique identifier of an animal. The current study examined the free-text 'examination record' field in the electronic patient records of 1000 randomly selected dogs and cats in the VCA database. This field may allow identification of the date of microchip implantation, enabling comparison with other date fields in the database, such as date of birth. The study revealed that the median age at implantation for dogs presented as individual patients, rather than among litters, was 74.4 days, significantly lower than for cats (127.0 days, p = 0.003). Further exploration into reasons for later microchipping in cats may be useful in aligning common practice with legislative requirements.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityPaul McGreevy, Sophie Masters, Leonie Richards, Ricardo J. Soares Magalhaes, Anne Peaston, Martin Combs ... et al.-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherMDPI-
dc.rights© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).-
dc.source.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9070423-
dc.subjectVetCompass Australia-
dc.subjectcats-
dc.subjectdogs-
dc.subjectmicrochip-
dc.subjectstrays-
dc.titleIdentification of microchip implantation events for dogs and cats in the vetcompass Australia database-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/ani9070423-
dc.relation.granthttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/LE160100026-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
dc.identifier.orcidPeaston, A. [0000-0002-7501-2415]-
Appears in Collections:Animal and Veterinary Sciences publications
Aurora harvest 4

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_121146.pdfPublished version494.74 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.