Functional Outcomes in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Animal-Assisted Therapy on Middle-Aged and Older Adults with Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deficits in cognition, physical, and social functions in adults with schizophrenia may become salient with aging. While animal-assisted therapy (AAT) can benefit physical function in older adults and improve symptoms of psychotic disorders, the effect of AAT on middle-aged patients with schizophrenia is unclear. The current randomized controlled trial aimed to explore the efficacy of AAT for middle-aged patients with schizophrenia. Forty participants were randomly assigned to either the AAT or control group. The AAT group participated in one-hour sessions with dog-assisted group activities once a week for 12 weeks. The controls participated in dose-matched, non-animal-related recreational activities. Both groups remained on their usual psychotropic medication during the trial. Evaluations included the Chair Stand Test (CST), Timed Up-and-Go (TUG) test, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), 5-Meter walk test (5MWT), and Assessment of Communication and Interaction Skills (ACIS). The increases in CST repetitions and ACIS scores were larger in the AAT group than in the controls. The two groups did not differ significantly in MoCA scores, TUG performance, or the 5MWT. The AAT group showed a greater increase in lower extremity strength and social skills, but no improvement in cognitive function, agility, or mobility. Further research with more sensitive evaluations and longer follow-up is needed.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".