11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Specific and Non-specific Factors of Animal-Assisted Interventions Considered in Research: A Systematic Review

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Research on animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) has increased massively in the last few years. But it is still not clear how AAIs work and how important the animal is in such interventions. The aim of this systematic review was to compile the existing state of knowledge about the working mechanisms of AAIs. We searched 12 major electronic databases for previous AAI studies with active control groups. Of 2001 records identified, we included 172 studies in the systematic review. We extracted previously published hypotheses about working mechanisms and factors that have been implicitly considered specific or non-specific in AAI research by categorizing control conditions using content analysis. We analyzed the categories using descriptive statistics. We found that 84% of the included studies mentioned a hypothesis of working mechanisms, but 16% did not define specific hypotheses. By analyzing their control conditions, we found that in most controlled studies, the animal or the interaction with the animal was implicitly considered as a specific factor for the effects of the AAI. Non-specific factors such as therapeutic aspects, social interactions, or novelty have also been controlled for. We conclude that AAI research still cannot answer the question of how and why AAIs work. To address this important research gap, we suggest using component studies with innovative control conditions and results from placebo research to address both the specific and non-specific, contextual factors of AAIs to disentangle its mechanisms.

          Systematic Review Registration

          https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=158103, identifier: CRD42020158103.

          Related collections

          Most cited references121

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies

          Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy synthesize data from primary diagnostic studies that have evaluated the accuracy of 1 or more index tests against a reference standard, provide estimates of test performance, allow comparisons of the accuracy of different tests, and facilitate the identification of sources of variability in test accuracy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Mediators and mechanisms of change in psychotherapy research.

            There has been enormous progress in psychotherapy research. This has culminated in recognition of several treatments that have strong evidence in their behalf. Even so, after decades of psychotherapy research, we cannot provide an evidence-based explanation for how or why even our most well studied interventions produce change, that is, the mechanism(s) through which treatments operate. This chapter presents central requirements for demonstrating mediators and mechanisms of change and reviews current data-analytic and designs approaches and why they fall short of meeting these requirements. The role of the therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy and cognitive changes in cognitive therapy for depression are highlighted to illustrate key issues. Promising lines of work to identify mediators and mechanisms, ways of bringing to bear multiple types of evidence, recommendations to make progress in understanding how therapy works, and conceptual and research challenges in evaluating mediators and mechanisms are also presented.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              How important are the common factors in psychotherapy? An update.

              The common factors have a long history in the field of psychotherapy theory, research and practice. To understand the evidence supporting them as important therapeutic elements, the contextual model of psychotherapy is outlined. Then the evidence, primarily from meta-analyses, is presented for particular common factors, including alliance, empathy, expectations, cultural adaptation, and therapist differences. Then the evidence for four factors related to specificity, including treatment differences, specific ingredients, adherence, and competence, is presented. The evidence supports the conclusion that the common factors are important for producing the benefits of psychotherapy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                28 June 2022
                2022
                : 13
                : 931347
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel , Basel, Switzerland
                [2] 2Division of Clinical Psychology and Animal-Assisted Interventions, Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel , Basel, Switzerland
                [3] 3REHAB Basel, Clinic for Neurorehabilitation and Paraplegiology , Basel, Switzerland
                [4] 4Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Human and Animal Health Unit, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute , Allschwil, Switzerland
                [5] 5Faculty of Psychology, Open University , Heerlen, Netherlands
                Author notes

                Edited by: Fabrizio Stasolla, Giustino Fortunato University, Italy

                Reviewed by: Laura Contalbrigo, Experimental Zooprophylactic Institute of the Venezie (IZSVe), Italy; Francesco Chirico, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Italy

                *Correspondence: Cora Wagner cora.wagner@ 123456unibas.ch

                This article was submitted to Psychology for Clinical Settings, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2022.931347
                9274084
                35837630
                690995f0-d3eb-4005-aa49-14454f05b8d6
                Copyright © 2022 Wagner, Grob and Hediger.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 28 April 2022
                : 06 June 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 122, Pages: 26, Words: 17864
                Categories
                Psychology
                Systematic Review

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                specific factor,contextual factor,mechanism,systematic review,animal-assisted intervention

                Comments

                Comment on this article