Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30744052›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2019

Canine Endogenous Oxytocin Responses to Dog-Walking and Affiliative Human⁻Dog Interactions.

Lauren Powell, Kate M Edwards, Adrian Bauman, Adam J Guastella, Bradley Drayton, Emmanuel Stamatakis, Paul McGreevy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Where Do We Stand in the Domestic Dog (Frontiers in psychology · 2020
    Review
  10. The Role of Oxytocin in the Dog-Owner Relationship.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lauren PowellCharles Perkins Centre, Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty ofMedicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia. lauren.powell@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-3141-5551
Kate M EdwardsCharles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia. kate.edwards@sydney.edu.au.
Adrian BaumanCharles Perkins Centre, Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty ofMedicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia. adrian.bauman@sydney.edu.au.
Adam J GuastellaAutism Clinic for Translational Research, Brain and Mind Centre, Central Clinical School, Sydney MedicalSchool, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, Australia. adam.guastella@sydney.edu.au.
Bradley DraytonCharles Perkins Centre, Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty ofMedicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia. bradley.drayton@sydney.edu.au.
Emmanuel StamatakisCharles Perkins Centre, Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty ofMedicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia. emmanuel.stamatakis@sydney.edu.au.
Paul McGreevySydney School of Veterinary Science, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, Australia. paul.mcgreevy@sydney.edu.au.
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

Ms. Lynne Cattell University of Sydney grant ID: 183100National Health and Medical Research Council APP1110526
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies suggest human⁻dog interactions elicit a positive effect on canine oxytocin concentrations. However, empirical investigations are scant and the joint influence of human⁻dog interaction and physical activity remains unexplored. The aims of the current study were to (a) examine the canine endogenous oxytocin response to owner-led dog-walking and affiliative human⁻dog interactions and (b) investigate the moderating effect of the owner-reported strength of the human⁻dog bond on such responses. Twenty-six dogs took part in a random order cross-over trial, involving dog-walking and human⁻dog interactions. Urinary samples were collected before and after each condition. The data were analyzed using linear mixed models with condition, order of conditions, condition duration, and latency from initiation of condition to urine sample collection considered as fixed effects, and the participant was considered a random effect. Canine urinary oxytocin concentrations did not differ significantly following dog-walking (mean change: -14.66 pg/mg Cr; 95% CI: -47.22, 17.90) or affiliative human⁻dog interactions (mean change: 6.94 pg/mg Cr; 95% CI: -26.99, 40.87). The reported strength of the human⁻dog bond did not significantly moderate the canine oxytocin response to either experimental condition. Contrary to our hypothesis, we did not observe evidence for a positive oxytocin response to dog-walking or human⁻dog interactions.

Identifiers

PMID30744052
PMCPMC6406532
OpenAlexW2911966369

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.