Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29402247›Full record

SynthesisBMC psychiatry2018

The power of support from companion animals for people living with mental health problems: a systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence.

Helen Louise Brooks, Kelly Rushton, Karina Lovell, Penny Bee, Lauren Walker, Laura Grant, Anne Rogers

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 118 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
118citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

118 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The Impact of Pet Videos on Emotional Face Processing.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

58 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Helen Louise BrooksPsychology of Healthcare Research Group, Department of Psychological Sciences, Institute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. Helen.brooks@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2157-0200
Kelly RushtonMental Health Research Group, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Karina LovellMental Health Research Group, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Penny BeeMental Health Research Group, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Lauren WalkerMental Health Research Group, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Laura GrantUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Anne RogersNIHR CLAHRC Wessex, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-1210-12007National Institute of Health Research RP-PG-1210-12007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is increasing recognition of the therapeutic function pets can play in relation to mental health. However, there has been no systematic review of the evidence related to the comprehensive role of companion animals and how pets might contribute to the work associated with managing a long-term mental health condition. The aim of this study was to explore the extent, nature and quality of the evidence implicating the role and utility of pet ownership for people living with a mental health condition.

methodsA systematic search for studies exploring the role of companion animals in the management of mental health conditions was undertaken by searching 9 databases and undertaking a scoping review of grey literature from the earliest record until March 2017. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to be published in English and report on primary data related to the relationship between domestic animal ownership and the management of diagnosable mental health conditions. Synthesis of qualitative and quantitative data was undertaken in parallel using a narrative synthesis informed by an illness work theoretical framework.

resultsA total of 17 studies were included in the review. Quantitative evidence relating to the benefits of pet ownership was mixed with included studies demonstrating positive, negative and neutral impacts of pet ownership. Qualitative studies illuminated the intensiveness of connectivity people with companion animals reported, and the multi-faceted ways in which pets contributed to the work associated with managing a mental health condition, particularly in times of crisis. The negative aspects of pet ownership were also highlighted, including the practical and emotional burden of pet ownership and the psychological impact that losing a pet has.

conclusionThis review suggests that pets provide benefits to those with mental health conditions. Further research is required to test the nature and extent of this relationship, incorporating outcomes that cover the range of roles and types of support pets confer in relation to mental health and the means by which these can be incorporated into the mainstay of support for people experiencing a mental health problem.

Indexed as

Human-Animal BondNarrationAnimalsEmotionsHumansMental DisordersMental HealthPetsQualitative ResearchMental healthNarrative synthesisNetworks of supportPersonal communitiesPetsSelf-managementSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29402247
PMCPMC5800290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.