Blog
About

10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Methodological Considerations in Designing and Evaluating Animal-Assisted Interventions

      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

          Simple Summary

          There is a growing literature on the benefits of companion animals to human mental and physical health. Despite the literature base, these benefits are not well understood, because of flawed methodologies. This paper draws upon four systematic reviews, focusing exclusively on the use of canine-assisted interventions for older people residing in long-term care. Two guides are offered for researchers, one for qualitative research, one for quantitative studies, in order to improve the empirical basis of knowledge. Research in the area of the human-animal bond and the potential benefits that derive from it can be better promoted with the use of uniform and rigorous methodological approaches.

          Abstract

          This paper presents a discussion of the literature on animal-assisted interventions and describes limitations surrounding current methodological quality. Benefits to human physical, psychological and social health cannot be empirically confirmed due to the methodological limitations of the existing body of research, and comparisons cannot validly be made across different studies. Without a solid research base animal-assisted interventions will not receive recognition and acceptance as a credible alternative health care treatment. The paper draws on the work of four systematic reviews conducted over April–May 2009, with no date restrictions, focusing exclusively on the use of canine-assisted interventions for older people residing in long-term care. The reviews revealed a lack of good quality studies. Although the literature base has grown in volume since its inception, it predominantly consists of anecdotal accounts and reports. Experimental studies undertaken are often flawed in aspects of design, conduct and reporting. There are few qualitative studies available leading to the inability to draw definitive conclusions. It is clear that due to the complexities associated with these interventions not all weaknesses can be eliminated. However, there are basic methodological weaknesses that can be addressed in future studies in the area. Checklists for quantitative and qualitative research designs to guide future research are offered to help address methodological rigour.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Animals (Basel)
          Animals (Basel)
          animals
          Animals : an Open Access Journal from MDPI
          MDPI
          2076-2615
          27 February 2013
          March 2013
          : 3
          : 1
          : 127-141
          Affiliations
          [1 ]The Joanna Briggs Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; E-Mail: cindy.stern@ 123456adelaide.edu.au
          [2 ]Discipline of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
          Author notes
          [* ]Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: anna.churhansen@ 123456adelaide.edu.au ; Tel.: +61-8-8222-5785; Fax: +61-8-8222-2865.
          Article
          animals-03-00127
          10.3390/ani3010127
          4495515
          © 2013 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

          This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

          Categories
          Article

          Comments

          Comment on this article