Numerous factors may influence veterinarians' prescribing decisions. This paper focuses on the efficacy of teat sealants compared to antibiotics, although many other factors were evaluated in the study. Evidence-based practice relies heavily on up-datingbeliefs following the evaluation of new data. Yet people do not always respond logically when shown new evidence, especially if it contradicts their pre-existing beliefs. This study demonstrates a practical method to quantify veterinarians' beliefs regarding the efficacy of an antibiotic versus a teat sealant, pre- and post-exposure to new evidence. It assessed how logically veterinarians updated their beliefs by comparing how they changed to a gold standard: predictions from Bayes theorem. Results suggest that some veterinarians are not convinced of the efficacy of teat sealants, which has implications for responsible antimicrobial prescribing. The results also suggest that some veterinarians may need additional training to help them update their beliefs logically when challenged with new evidence.
展开▼
