Having worked in scientific research for over a decade, I can tell you that there is a lot of research out there in the world… on every topic that you could possibly think of… often spanning decades… some good, some bad and some very much indifferent.
As a researcher, you learn early on a few key things about analyzing the scientific literature to help you to navigate your way through what can often be both a mountain and minefield of information. The first lesson is that, just because it is published doesn’t make it right/true/valid/accurate. Yes, publication matters because it is the bread and butter of research in terms of getting your work out there, but where that information is published (i.e. the caliber of the journal) and how rigorous the review process is an important part of interpreting the relevance, impact and importance of that information to the field. The second aspect to consider is the experimental design – how many subjects/participants were involved, how were the treatments distributed, was there an adequate placebo/control, what statistical analyses were used, was there modeling involved (not the Kate Moss type of modeling…) and if so, were there any flaws or limitations to that approach, was the research funded by a company with a vested interest…. Thirdly, look at the results; were the differences significant, convincing, close? How close together or far apart were the outcomes? Was there much variation? Often these insights can be clues to inadequate experimental design or insufficient animals numbers, all of which impact our interpretation of the results and/or confidence in the outcomes. This list barely touches the surface of what it means to evaluate the scientific literature, and is the reason why to work in research is to be a critical thinker, a skill that has to be continuously honed and improved.
So, when evaluating the scientific literature on a topic as complex as gastric ulcers in horses, it is very beneficial to come across what is known in the world of research as a ‘consensus article’, where expert researchers in the field got together to evaluate the current understanding of the field. The first recommendation to come out of this article (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jvim.13578) addressed the terminology used around gastric ulcers, which in itself can be somewhat confusing for the everyday horse owner. The authors determined that the term ‘Equine Gastric Ulcer Syndrome’ is an umbrella term that covers any form of ulcer/lesion or abrasion in the foregut of the horse. From there, there are two distinct conditions – Equine Squamous Gastric Disease and Equine Glandular Gastric Disease. As discussed in our previous blog, these two conditions are distinctly different in their pathology and need to be considered differently in terms of treatment, causation and risk factors.
Over the next few weeks, we will explore and summarise some of the key recommendations and often misconceptions associated with each of these conditions to give a baseline of understanding to help us to manage our horses to help to minimise these debilitating yet often misunderstood conditions.
References
Sykes et al., European College of Equine Internal Medicine Consensus Statement—Equine Gastric Ulcer Syndrome in Adult Horses J Vet Intern Med 2015;29:1288–1299
Comments are closed.