ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025
Cow-Assisted Interventions in Social Farming: First Results of a Pilot Study.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Social farming combines agricultural, social, and healthcare functions, and Animal-Assisted Interventions (AAIs) are increasingly being applied within this framework. Despite their potential, cattle are excluded from Italian guidelines and rarely studied. This pilot study explored the feasibility, effects, and economic sustainability of cow-assisted interventions within social farming in Umbria, Italy. It represents an original and innovative contribution, drawing attention to the therapeutic potential of the human-cow relationship. The study presents an experimental cow therapy protocol and proposes behavioral monitoring tools designed both for people with different disabilities and for the animals involved. Four Red Pied Valdostana cows were involved in structured sessions with three groups: adolescents removed from families, young adults with mental health disorders, and individuals with eating disorders. Activities included observation, feeding, grooming, problem solving, and leading. Human outcomes were assessed regarding emotional, relational, and behavioral dimensions, and animal welfare was continuously monitored. A cost analysis was also conducted for Animal-Assisted Activity (AAA), Animal-Assisted Education (AAE), and Animal-Assisted Therapy (AAT). Participants reported improved self-esteem, emotional expression, and social interaction; the eating disorder group showed greater openness toward dairy consumption. Animal welfare remained stable with high tolerance to handling. Costs were driven mainly by professional staff rather than animal care, with average hourly costs of €74.51 (AAA), €144.99 (AAE), and €172.41 (AAT). The comparative analysis demonstrates a clear trade-off: as the intervention shifts from recreational (AAA) to educational (AAE) and finally to therapeutic (AAT), the financial investment increases in parallel with the level of professionalization, personalization, and expected clinical outcomes. Cow-assisted interventions proved to be safe, feasible, and beneficial, supporting their potential inclusion in Italian guidelines on AAIs.
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.