The Intersection of “What We Want to Know” and “What We Can Do”: Clinical Research at JASMINE Veterinary Cardiovascular Medical Center

Abstract

In small animal practice, a substantial gap in high-quality evidence persists compared to human medicine. Bridging this gap requires the application of clinical epidemiological thinking, which involves a rigorous process of balancing an ideal "Research Question (what we want to know)" with a feasible "Study Plan (what we can do)" while maximizing scientific validity. This article illustrates this essential process through two clinical research studies: a retrospective cohort study to develop a prognostic prediction model for 30-day mortality after mitral valve repair (MVR) in dogs, and a randomized controlled trial comparing the myocardial protective effects of two cardioplegias in dogs undergoing MVR. Through these examples, this paper argues that the quality of research is largely determined during the planning phase. It highlights the importance of prospectively identifying study limitations and addressing them through meticulous design and analysis. Fostering a clinical epidemiological mindset is essential for advancing high-quality clinical research in veterinary medicine.