ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2020
Variability in Human-Animal Interaction Research.
Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 87 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
87 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the effects of human-animal interactions on health and well-being of older adults: an umbrella review.BMC geriatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Access to veterinary care: evaluating working definitions, barriers, and implications for animal welfare.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Pooled it
- Assistance dogs for military veterans with PTSD: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-synthesis.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Specific and Non-specific Factors of Animal-Assisted Interventions Considered in Research: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Intraoral clinical examinations of pediatric patients with anticipatory anxiety and situational fear facilitated by therapy dog assistance: A pilot RCT.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2023Trial
- Trial
- (Self-)caring with companion animals: a qualitative exploration of how companion animals shape everyday practices of rest and relaxation.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026Article
- The neural and physiological mechanisms of Animal-Assisted Interventions (AAI): A systematic review and integrated framework.Comprehensive psychoneuroendocrinology · 2026Review
- A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Examining the Impact of Therapy Dog Visitation on Mood, Anxiety, and Depression in Patients Hospitalized for the Treatment of Mental Illness.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Animal-Assisted Interventions for Neurodivergent Individuals: Advancing Research, Practice, and Well-Being.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The relation between household dogs and cats during childhood/adolescence with social role outcomes and loneliness among youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of animal-assisted therapy in adolescent psychiatric inpatients: a multicenter clinical trial.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2026Article
- Human-animal relationships in older persons: from pet companionship to animal-assisted interventions. A position statement.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2026Review
- Parental Identity and Subjective Well-Being in Older Women: The Moderating Role of the Human-Dog Bond.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Dogs' Behavioural Responses to Dog-Assisted Interventions: A Field Study.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Effects of dog ownership on children's social-emotional development: findings from the PLAYCE cohort study.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Exploring Cat-Human Interaction as a Psychosocial Resource in Autism and ADHD: Risks, Engagement, and Well-Being.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Bonded Green Exercise: A One Health Framework for Shared Nature-Based Physical Activity in the Human-Dog Dyad.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Cross-species conversations: the development of the AURAL-Pet coding system to capture how people talk to pets in daily life.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
27 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The field of Human-Animal Interaction (HAI) is plagued with mixed results. Some findings appear to indicate that interacting with a companion animal is beneficial for some aspect of human health and well-being, while other research outcomes are inconclusive or even indicate the opposite. The purpose of this paper is to take a closer look at this variability in research outcomes and to provide plausible explanations and potential remedies. Some of the reasons for mixed results are likely due to the wide variety of methodologies implemented, intermittent use of standardized measures and manualized protocols, variability in human and animal participants, and limited quantification of human-animal interactions or definitions of pet ownership. Variability in research outcomes is not unique to HAI and is, in fact, not uncommon in many more established fields such as psychology and medicine. However, the potential reasons for the variability may be linked to the unique nature of HAI in that, in its' simplest form, it involves two complex organisms, a human and an animal, interacting in dynamic ways. We argue that this complexity makes research in this field particularly challenging and requires a broad spectrum of theoretical and methodological considerations to improve rigor while ensuring the validity and reliability of conclusions drawn from study results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.