SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2023
Network meta-analysis of comparative efficacy of animal-assisted therapy vs. pet-robot therapy in the management of dementia.
Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effectiveness of Animal-Assisted Interventions for People Living With Dementia: An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis.International journal of nursing practice · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This network meta-analysis aimed to compare and rank the efficacy of animal-assisted therapy (AAT) and pet-robotic therapy (PRT) in the management of dementia. Methods: Relevant studies were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, and Web of Science (WoS) until October 13, 2022. Traditional meta-analysis was first conducted based on the random-effects model, then random network meta-analysis was conducted to determine the relative efficacy and rank probability of AAT and PRT. Results: Nineteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this network meta-analysis. Network meta-analysis revealed that PRT marginally benefited agitation alleviation compared with control (standard mean difference [SMD]: -0.37, 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: -0.72 to -0.01) although both AAT and PRT did not improve cognitive function, reduce depression, and improve Quality of Life (QoL). The SUCRA probabilities indicated that PRT ranked better than AAT in agitation, cognitive function, and QoL, although there were no differences between the two therapies. Conclusion: The present network meta-analysis reveals that PRT may help alleviate agitated behaviors in people with dementia. However, future studies are warranted to establish evidence of the effectiveness of PRT and further evaluate the differences between different robot types in managing dementia.
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.