Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34844454›Full record

ArticleScience progress2021

Dog-related activities and human well-being in Brazilian dog owners: A framework and cross-cultural comparison with a British study.

Graziani F Corrêa, Ana Maria Barcelos, Daniel S Mills

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science progress, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Graziani F CorrêaSchool of Life Sciences, 4547University of Lincoln, UK.
Ana Maria BarcelosSchool of Life Sciences, 4547University of Lincoln, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2727-5058
Daniel S MillsSchool of Life Sciences, 4547University of Lincoln, UK.
University of Lincoln · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the abundance of studies investigating the benefits of having a dog, the specific aspects of dog ownership that impacts human well-being are not well understood. This study used a qualitative approach to create a framework of the main dog-related activities perceived by Brazilian owners to impact their well-being and compared the findings with those of a similar study in England. Thirty-two Brazilian dog owners from the five regions of the country were remotely interviewed. The thematic analysis of the transcripts generated a total of 58 dog-related activities, organised into 13 themes. Most activities were reported to have a positive effect on participants' well-being, accounting for 76.8% of the total number of mentions in the interviews. 'Playing with dog' and 'Dog presence' were the themes most frequently associated with positive well-being outcomes, whereas 'Unwanted behaviours' and 'Failing to meet dog's needs' were the most commonly associated with negative outcomes. The dog-related activities reported by Brazilian dog owners and the well-being outcomes linked to those activities were consistent with the previous British sample in the framework that emerged. These findings suggest reliability between the two methods used to gather data (remote interview versus focus group) and, most importantly, provide consistent cross-cultural evidence for how certain activities impact dog owner's well-being.

Indexed as

Cross-Cultural ComparisonHuman-Animal BondAnimalsBrazilDogsHumansOwnershipReproducibility of ResultsBrazilianBritishdog ownershipmental healthpet ownershippsychological well-beingsubjective well-being

Identifiers

PMID34844454
PMCPMC10306145
OpenAlexW3215765715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.