Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39141654›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Dog, cat, bird, fish, and other pet ownership and mortality: Evidence from the HILDA cohort.

Yu Taniguchi, Tomoko Ikeuchi, Jongsay Yong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

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

Yu TaniguchiJapan Environment and Children's Study Programme Office, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2442-2406
Tomoko IkeuchiResearch Team for Human Care, Tokyo Metropolitan Institute for Geriatrics and Gerontology (TMIG), Tokyo, Japan.
Jongsay YongMelbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, Faculty of Business and Economics Building 111 Barry Street, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study used the nationally representative prospective study of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey cohort to examine the association of pet ownership (dog, cat, bird, fish, and others) with the risk of all-cause mortality using propensity score matching based on a wide range of factors. The study sample included 15,735 participants who completed the questionnaire on pet ownership in 2018. The HILDA survey sample was matched to the National Death Index through 2022 to assess death during the follow-up period. Statistical analysis was weighted by the inverse of the propensity score in the generalized estimating equation. During the 4-year follow-up period, 377 of 15,735 (2.4%) participants died. The odds ratios (ORs) for all-cause mortality were 0.77 (95%CI: 0.59-0.99) for dog owners compared to non-pet owners after controlling for related socio-demographic, physical, psychological, and social factors. The Sobel test showed a partial mediating effect of physical activity level on the relationship between dog ownership and all-cause mortality. Ownership of cats, birds, fish, and others showed no clear association with mortality, despite owners having similar socio-demographics characteristics to dog owners. Companionship and exercise of a pet dog may be recommended as a component of health promotion policy, and may have an important role to play in promoting health aging.

Indexed as

FishesOwnershipPetsAdolescentAdultAgedAnimalsAustraliaBirdsCatsDogsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMortality

Identifiers

PMID39141654
PMCPMC11324118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.