Table 2

Responses to the owner questionnaire, ordinal and continuous answers.






Number of owners with a response
Question
 Mean
 STD
 Median
 Min
 Max
 0
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
 10
1b. How many people were there in the household?
 2.6
 1.2
 2
 1
 6
 -
 -
 -
 -
 -
 -
 -
 -
 -
 -
 -
How many dogs were there in the household?
 1.7
 0.7
 2
 1
 3










How many cats were there in the household?
 0.7
 1.2
 0
 0
 4










2b. My overall impression how RT was experienced by my dog (quality of life), from initiating RT until side effects had declined.
 0 = good quality- 10 = severe negative impact on dog







2.9
 2.4
 2
 0
 8
 4
 3
 6
 4
 0
 2
 1
 2
 1
 0
 0








3b. Reactions from acquaintances when informed that my dog had undergone RT for cancer.


Percent
 0
 10
 20
 30
 40
 50
 60
 70
 80
 90
 100




Positive reactions %
 76.9
 29.5
 90
 0
 100
 1
 0
 2
 0
 0
 2
 0
 4
 2
 4
 8
Negative reactions %
 14.3
 19.8
 10
 0
 80
 10
 5
 4
 2
 0
 1
 0
 0
 1
 0
 0
Neutral or No reaction %
 11.8
 26.8
 0
 0
 100
 18
 2
 0
 0
 0
 1
 1
 0
 0
 0
 1






0 = Calm, confident – 10 = Very stressful and inconvenient






Overall: My own experience from start of RT until side effects declined
 2.3
 1.9
 2
 0
 6
 5
 3
 7
 2
 1
 4
 1
 0
 0
 0
 0
4b. Would I choose RT again in a similar situation?















Grade the importance of following factors deciding to treat with RT or not




0 = no importance, negligible- 10 = crucial influence, very important.






My financial costa
 2.2
 2.6
 1
 0
 8
 9
 3
 2
 1
 2
 3
 0
 0
 2
 0
 0
Prognosis: chance for curea
 7.3
 3.1
 8
 0
 10
 2
 0
 0
 0
 1
 4
 0
 2
 3
 2
 8
Prognosis: chance for longer life without tumour related discomforta
 9.5
 1.1
 10
 6
 10
 0
 0
 0
 0
0
 1
 1
 1
 2
 17
Severity of expected side effectsa
 6.6
 2.4
 7
 1
 10
 0
 1
 0
 2
 0
 5
 2
 4
 3
 2
 3
Number of treatments requireda
 3.0
 2.8
 2
 0
 10
 6
 1
 5
 2
 1
 4
 1
 1
 0
 0
 1
My investment in time and travel
 2.3
 2.7
 2
 0
 10
 9
 1
 4
 2
 0
 3
 1
 1
 0
 0
 1

a one response missing, b for titles of sections 1–4, see tables 1a and 1b

Denneberg and Egenvall Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 2009 51:19   doi:10.1186/1751-0147-51-19