Evidence-based medicine in bovine, equine and canine reproduction: Quality of current literature

The objective was to evaluate deficits and differences of published literature on reproduction in cattle, horses, and dogs. A literature search was conducted in the databases Medline and Veterinary Science. Approximately five times more articles on clinical bovine reproduction (n = 25 910) were found compared to canine (n = 5 015) and equine (n = 5 090) reproduction. For the evaluation of the literature, a checklist was used. A subset of 600 articles published between 1999 and 2008 was randomly selected. After applying exclusion criteria, a total of 268 trials (86 for cattle, 99 for horses, and 83 for dogs) were evaluated and used for further analysis. For the field of canine and equine reproduction, there were fewer clinical trials with a control group compared to bovine reproduction (cattle 66%, horses 41%, and dogs 41%). For all three species investigated, few publications were identified (4%) with the highest level of evidence, i.e., controlled, randomized, and blinded trials, or meta-analyses. In cattle 33% of the publications were graded adequate to draw sound conclusions; however, only 7 and 11% were graded adequate in dogs and horses, respectively. Therefore, the veterinarian should always assess the quality of information before implementing results into practice to provide best available care for the animals. In conclusion, improvement of the quality of well-designed, conducted and reported clinical trails in animal reproduction is required.