Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42244242›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences2026

Evidence of Physiological Comodulation During Human-Animal Interaction: A Systematic Review.

Ginevra Bargigli, Lorenzo Frassineti, Paolo Baragli, Chiara Scopa, Aglaia Vignoli, Antonio Lanata

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Ginevra BargigliComPBioS, Department of Information Engineering, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8352-7538
Lorenzo FrassinetiComPBioS, Department of Information Engineering, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Paolo BaragliDepartment of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5221-5714
Chiara ScopaDepartment of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Aglaia VignoliDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Antonio LanataComPBioS, Department of Information Engineering, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

Funding

National Recovery and Resilience Plan
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review examines the evidence in the literature for physiological co-modulation during human-animal interaction, identifying studies that assessed comodulation via simultaneous measurement of physiological signals in both species, performing quantitative comparisons. We searched (last search: August 5, 2025) PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Google Scholar, Animal Studies Repository, Cochrane, and the Consensus App academic search engine. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted version of the ROBINS-I V2 tool. The results, grouped by data analysis method, interaction context, and physiological parameter, were synthesized narratively in structured tables. Thirty-seven studies were included, focusing on dogs (n = 22) and horses (n = 15), framed primarily within the interaction contexts of animal-assisted therapy/intervention and companionship. Cardiac and hormonal measures were most frequently assessed. Most studies (n = 20) performed correlation analyses. Sample sizes ranged from

Indexed as

Human-Animal BondHuman-Animal InteractionAnimalsDogsHorsesHumanscomodulationcortisolHAIheart ratehuman–animal interactionphysiologicalsynchrony

Identifiers

PMID42244242
PMCPMC13238372

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.