SynthesisInternational journal of nursing practice2026
The Effectiveness of Animal-Assisted Interventions for People Living With Dementia: An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of nursing practice, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThis overview aims to provide high-quality evidence synthesis of animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) among people living with dementia.
backgroundDementia has become the seventh leading cause of death in the world. Unfortunately, currently effective pharmacological interventions remain elusive. As a non-pharmacological treatment, AAI is gaining more attention while the effectiveness of AAI for people living with dementia remains unclear.
methodsEMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, CNKI, VIP, CBM and Wanfang databases were searched from inception to March 2026. The AMSTAR2 was used to assess the methodological quality of the included reviews. Meta-analysis was conducted using STATA 16 for the original studies identified from the included reviews. Evidence quality of main outcomes was assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines.
resultsSixteen systematic reviews were included in the overview. A significant improvement was found in depression among dementia patients, but not in agitation, quality of life (QOL), cognition and activities of daily living (ADL).
conclusionsThere is moderate evidence that AAI has positive effects on depression for people living with dementia. Despite searches, no sufficient evidence has been found to substantiate the positive effects of AAI on other outcomes in people living with dementia. Due to the small number of studies, small sample sizes and significant heterogeneity, more randomised controlled trials with large samples are needed.
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.