10-year review maps how vets use BestBETs for Vets: full analysis

A 10-year review of BestBETs for Vets is shedding light on how veterinary professionals use one of the field’s better-known evidence synthesis tools, and what kinds of clinical questions they most want answered. The Veterinary Record Open study examined the content of the database and user interaction patterns over a decade, finding 96 published critically appraised topics, with canine medicine and reproduction standing out as the most common areas represented. Website analytics also showed global reach, with visitors from more than 190 countries and most traffic arriving through direct access. (researchgate.net)

That matters because BestBETs for Vets was built to fill a familiar gap in practice: clinicians often need a usable answer quickly, but the veterinary evidence base doesn’t always offer a recent guideline, systematic review, or high-quality trial on the question in front of them. The resource was launched by the University of Nottingham’s Centre for Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine in 2013, and its BET format was adapted to provide concise, structured answers to focused clinical questions. In veterinary medicine, CATs have become one practical bridge between primary research and point-of-care decision-making, particularly when time, staffing, and appraisal expertise are limited. (exchange.nottingham.ac.uk)

The new review’s descriptive findings help quantify that use. According to the study abstract, dogs made up 38.5% of CATs in the database, and reproduction was the most frequent topic area, accounting for 18 of the 96 CATs. The authors also reviewed intervention types, study designs, and the number of relevant papers included in CATs, alongside usage metrics such as page views, access routes, countries of origin, and trends over time. One notable finding was that direct traffic, at 56.8%, outpaced organic search, at 25.2%, which may suggest that many users were returning intentionally to a known evidence resource rather than discovering it casually through search engines. That last point is an inference from the traffic pattern, not a direct claim from the authors. (researchgate.net)

The broader literature helps explain why that pattern is worth watching. A 2020 Frontiers in Veterinary Science review on CATs described these resources as faster, more pragmatic evidence syntheses than systematic reviews, and specifically identified BestBETs for Vets as one of the established veterinary CAT formats. The same review noted that many veterinary CAT resources emerged over the past decade as the profession looked for ways to make evidence more usable in clinical settings. Other surveys and educational resources have similarly pointed to demand for freely available, practice-oriented summaries that can support clinical judgment rather than replace it. (frontiersin.org)

Direct expert reaction to this new paper appears limited so far, but the surrounding commentary on evidence-based veterinary medicine is consistent. The Nottingham group and other EBVM advocates have long framed BestBETs as a way to support clinical decision-making with accessible summaries of the current best evidence. In the CAT literature, authors emphasize that these tools are especially useful where systematic reviews are unavailable, but they also stress that CATs depend on the quality and quantity of underlying studies. In other words, a well-used evidence database can still reveal how often the profession is making decisions in areas where the evidence base remains incomplete. (exchange.nottingham.ac.uk)

Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, this review is useful on two levels. First, it validates that evidence synthesis tools are being used internationally, and not just as academic exercises. Second, it offers a demand signal. If canine and reproduction topics are overrepresented in both content and usage, that may reflect where clinicians most often encounter uncertainty, where pet parent questions are frequent, or where the literature is especially fragmented. For educators, publishers, and evidence groups, that kind of pattern can help prioritize future CATs, knowledge summaries, and teaching efforts in evidence-based practice. For clinicians, it’s also a reminder that resources like BestBETs can support decisions efficiently, but they work best when paired with clinical expertise, patient context, and transparent conversations with pet parents about uncertainty. (researchgate.net)

What to watch: The next step is whether the findings lead to more targeted topic development, updates to older CATs, or broader integration of evidence tools into veterinary education and practice workflows. Given the continuing push toward evidence-based decision-making, and newer interest in real-world data and AI-assisted information retrieval, usage analyses like this could become more important in shaping which clinical questions get answered first. (researchgate.net)