MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795469697 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0194731

Impact of an animal-assisted therapy programme on physiological and psychosocial variables of paediatric oncology patients

2018· article· en· W2795469697 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nathiana B. Silva, Flávia L. Osório

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoHospital de Câncer de Barretos
KeywordsMedicineAnxietyPsychosocialQuality of life (healthcare)MoodAnimal-assisted therapyVomitingDepression (economics)Intervention (counseling)Physical therapyInternal medicineAnimal welfarePsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to propose an intervention and safety protocol for performing animal-assisted therapy (AAT) and evaluating its efficacy in children under outpatient oncological treatment based on psychological, physiological, and quality of life indicators for the children and caregivers. The sample consisted of 24 children diagnosed with leukaemia and solid tumours (58% girls with a mean age of 8.0 years) who underwent an AAT programme consisting of three 30-min sessions in an open group. Two dogs (one Labrador retriever and one golden retriever) were used, and activities such as sensory stimulation, gait training, and socialization were conducted. The exclusion criteria were severe mental problems, inability to answer the questions included in the instruments used, allergy to animals, unavailability/lack of interest, isolation precaution, surgical wound, use of invasive devices, ostomy, no current blood count for evaluation, neutropaenia, infection, fever, diarrhoea, vomiting, respiratory symptoms at the beginning of the intervention or 1 week before the intervention, hospitalization or scheduled surgery, and non-completion of the AAT programme. The variables analysed using validated self or other evaluations were stress, pain, mood, anxiety, depression, quality of life, heart rate, and blood pressure. A quasi-experimental study design was used. We observed a decrease in pain (p = 0.046, d = -0.894), irritation (p = 0.041, d = -0.917), and stress (p = 0.005; d = -1.404) and a tendency towards improvement of depressive symptoms (p = 0.069; d = -0.801). Among the caregivers, an improvement was observed in anxiety (p = 0.007, d = -1.312), mental confusion (p = 0.006, d = -1.350), and tension (p = 0.006, d = -1.361). Therefore, the selection criteria and care protocols used for the AAT programme in the oncological context were adequate, and the programme was effective.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations121
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207