ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022
Human Health Benefits of Non-Conventional Companion Animals: A Narrative Review.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human-Chelonian Bond in Italy: An Exploratory Study of Pet Turtle and Tortoise Ownership.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Protective Factors for Falls Among Independent Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Investigation of awareness, sanitation, and customer education practices among employees of pet and animal feed stores that sell live animals in the United States.BMC public health · 2024Article
- From the Backyard to Our Beds: The Spectrum of Care, Attitudes, Relationship Types, and Welfare in Non-Commercial Chicken Care.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research investigating health benefits from household human-animal bonds has focused mostly on bonds with companion dogs, cats, and horses. Wellbeing benefits associated with other companion animal species such as birds, fish, and reptiles are described and anecdotally reported, but there is little empirical literature supporting this. The literature suggests that health benefits of companion animals are predicated on human perceptions of the animal rather than the animal's species. Therefore, relationships with non-conventional companion animals of diverse species may benefit the health of their human guardians as do dogs, cats, and horses. This narrative review summarizes the current literature exploring perceived health benefits gained from non-conventional companion animals. Searches were conducted for published literature and grey literature up to October 2022 across PsycINFO and PubMed databases, and Newsbank media database for commercial media publications. Nineteen studies and 10 media articles were included in the review. Gaps in the literature include a lack of rigorous research to investigate the health benefits of non-conventional companion animals. Non-conventional companion animals may benefit their guardians by providing social support through acting as attachment figures, facilitating social opportunities and daily routines, fulfilling cognitive needs, and recreating restorative capacities of mindfully observing natural landscapes. Further high-quality research into the human-non-conventional companion animal bond is warranted.
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.