Service Animals and Pet Therapy in Schools: Synthesizing a Review of the Literature
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the academic and social-emotional needs of students in schools continue to increase, so too does the presence of dogs in educational spaces. This article aims to present an overview of past and present animal-assisted intervention practices in school settings. This comprehensive literature review examines the current state of research within this field of study. Data from 29 publications were selected according to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results highlight three categories in which the presence of dogs in schools have an impact: social-emotional, cognitive, and physiological. Challenges to program implementation include health risks, cultural context, and negative effects on the animal. Due to the lack of school-based research, more study is needed, especially in order to understand the effect of dogs on the social-emotional learning of students. Finally, the welfare and training of the animals involved should be taken into consideration, and regulations regarding handler and animal training should be enforced.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it