Characteristics of clients and animals served by high-volume, stationary, nonprofit spay-neuter clinics
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To characterize the clients served by and the cats and dogs admitted to nonprofit spay-neuter clinics. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey. SAMPLE 2,154 dogs and 1,902 cats that were owned by 3,768 survey respondents and admitted to 22 nonprofit spay-neuter clinics across the United States between April 29, 2013, and January 24, 2014. PROCEDURES Participating clinics distributed surveys to clients during each of 4 quarterly study weeks. The survey collected descriptive information about clients' pets and households as well as their decision-making regarding sterilization of their pets. For each of the study weeks, clinics reported the total number of surgeries, including those involving shelter animals, feral cats, and other owned animals. RESULTS Respondents indicated that 49% of dogs and 77% of cats had not been examined previously by a veterinarian, except during vaccine clinics. Among animals ≥ 4 months of age, 1,144 of 1,416 (81%) cats and 572 of 1,794 (32%) dogs had not received a rabies vaccination. Previous litters were reported for 204 of 716 (28%) queens and 153 of 904 (17%) bitches. Most clients' (53%) household income was < $30,000 annually. Common reasons for clinic choice included cost; friend, neighbor, or family recommendation; and good reputation. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Nonprofit spay-neuter clinics predominantly served low-income clients and animals lacking regular veterinary care, in addition to animals from shelters and community cats. These clinics increase access to services needed for animal population control and public health.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A large number of owned cats had never seen a veterinarian, with the main reason given as "too expensive."
“Benka and McCobb (10) and White et al. (11) found that a large number of owned cats had never seen a veterinarian with the main reason given as “too expensive.””
From Implementing Nonlethal Solutions for Free-Roaming Cat Management in a County in the Southeastern United States (2019) · cites this paper as White et al. (11)
Cites
Population characteristics and neuter status of cats living in households in the United States
Chu, K., Anderson, W. M., & Rieser, M. Y. (2009) · Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · doi:10.2460/javma.234.8.1023 · Cited by 79 · cited 1× · see citing works
“People with lower incomes are nearly as likely to own cats or dogs as are people with higher incomes 11,12 ; however, a 2011 survey 13 found that 32% of 1,000 respondents with recently acquired, sexually intact pets stated that neutering was too expensive.”
BackgroundJohnson, K. L., & Cicirelli, J. (2014) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.646 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Scarlett, J., & Johnston, N. (2012) · Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science · doi:10.1080/10888705.2012.624902 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Self-citationHamilton, F. (2019) · Frontiers in Veterinary Science · doi:10.3389/fvets.2019.00259 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hamilton, F. (2019) · Frontiers in Veterinary Science · doi:10.3389/fvets.2019.00259 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
- Authors
- White, S. C., Scarlett, J. M., & Levy, J. K.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
- Published
- 2018-09-15
- Volume
- 253
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 737-745
- ISSN
- 0003-1488 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2890299756
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 4.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- WBI Studies Repository (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Medicine and Surgery
- Social Sciences › Law › Animal Law and Welfare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Veterinary Practice and Education Studies
- Keywords
- pet sterilization, client characteristics, low-income clients, veterinary care access, rabies vaccination, shelter animals, community cats, animal population control, household income, client decision-making, dogs, cats
- MeSH terms
- Ambulatory Care Facilities, Animals, Cats, Dogs, Female, Humans, Male, Organizations, Nonprofit, Ownership, Social Class, Sterilization, Reproductive, United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review