ArticleEvaluation and program planning2023
Remotely and collaboratively evaluating a campus-based therapy dog program during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Evaluation and program planning, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing interactive VR-based digital therapeutics for Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT): a structured framework for the digital transformation integrating gamification and multimodal arts.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Impact of Interactions with a Puppy and Handler Versus a Handler Alone on Stress and Vitality in a University Setting: A Crossover Study.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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected the wellbeing of university students and adults in general, emphasizing the need for mental health programming that was compliant with physical distancing mandates. The present evaluation investigated mental health and social connection within the context of COVID-19 by remotely evaluating a virtual animal-assisted activity at the University of Saskatchewan - PAWS Your Stress. The purpose of this article is to outline our evaluation methods and findings, while calling specific attention to the collaborative strategies that were implemented within a remote, time-sensitive context. The evaluation findings revealed that remote animal-assisted programming can facilitate connections with humans and animals, and promote multiple mental health benefits, despite the lack of physical interaction with the animals. Our lessons learned indicate that remote program logic modelling workshops are feasible when suited to audience demographics. Further, our experience suggests that the Most Significant Change technique (a qualitative, participatory, storytelling method that elicits outcome data) can be useful in time-restricted evaluations, and the necessity of central steps in the process may vary depending on evaluation goals. This project has implications for future evaluation work, by demonstrating the effective use of remote methods that allowed for successful stakeholder collaboration.
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.