SynthesisBMC geriatrics2026
Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the effects of human-animal interactions on health and well-being of older adults: an umbrella review.
Synthesis in BMC geriatrics, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch shows that older adults can experience physical, emotional, and social benefits from owning or interacting with pets. Different variables, such as the type of animal, the context, and the duration of human-animal contact, can influence the effects of animal companionship on health. This umbrella review aims to assess how interactions between animals and older adults impact health and wellbeing.
methodsAfter the definition and registration of the review protocol, five electronic medical databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched in June 2024 to find relevant second-level studies. Systematic reviews or meta-analyses assessing the association between exposure to animals and the physical, emotional, and mental health and well-being of individuals aged 60 years or older were included; studies focusing exclusively on animal-assisted treatments, conducted on older adults with a specific disease or medical condition, and written in a language other than English were excluded. The extracted information comprised the main author and year, objectives, review type, participant details, context and setting, number of databases searched with date range, number and design of studies included, quality ratings, methods used to synthesize evidence, and outcomes. The data extracted from qualitative and quantitative research were presented according to the different types of exposure and summarized for the different outcomes using a tabular presentation.
resultsThe main findings regard the beneficial effects of dog-assisted interventions on social interaction and loneliness of older adults living in facilities; also, dog owners appeared to engage in high levels of walking activity. Qualitative research reported that older adults attributed to pets an important role and a variety of beneficial impacts (i.e., emotional support, sensory engagement, reciprocal interactions); some negative aspects related to pet ownership were also described as worries for pets' health, and pets' related expenses.
conclusionsOlder adults living in facilities could benefit from dog assisted interventions to improve social interactions and decrease loneliness. Dog owners are found to benefit from the animal's companionship, particularly regarding higher levels of physical activity due to dog walking.
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.