Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42511061›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Development and Validation of an Observational Behavior Tool (LIFE

Meghan E Herron, Allison Martin, Seana Dowling-Guyer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 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. Review
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.

Meghan E HerronGigi's, Canal Winchester, OH 43110, USA.
Allison MartinGigi's, Canal Winchester, OH 43110, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-7371-7209
Seana Dowling-GuyerCenter for Animals and Public Policy, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1126-0102

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As animal shelters strive to promote positive welfare and successfully place dogs into adoptive homes as functional pets, the ability to identify dogs that may not be coping well within the shelter is critical. Although traditional behavior evaluations may serve multiple purposes, one of their primary purposes in animal shelters has been to predict how dogs may behave after adoption. Most traditional tests utilize a series of provocative and often artificial interactions, despite mixed evidence to support their predictive value. This study examined the reliability and validity of the LIFE (Living Interactions and Functionality Evaluation) tool, an observational assessment designed to evaluate canine coping abilities in real time within a shelter setting and identify dogs in need of intervention. Over 800 dogs were evaluated during routine shelter interactions, including kennel handling, leash walking, and interactions with people and other dogs. Observable behaviors associated with positive or negative emotional states were assigned numerical values to generate objective coping scores, which were then compared with subjective classifications assigned by trained evaluators and an expert in animal behavior. Objective scores increased significantly across subjective classification categories and aligned closely with expert assessments across all evaluated contexts. Inter-rater reliability was high, supporting consistency between evaluators. These findings support the LIFE tool as a valid and reliable welfare-focused assessment approach for identifying dogs experiencing coping difficulties within shelter environments and guiding more targeted intervention strategies, with or without a behavior expert on staff.

Indexed as

behaviordogdog–dog interactionsdog–human interactionsinter-rater reliabilityvaliditywelfare

Identifiers

PMID42511061
PMCPMC13405833

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.