MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401665145 · doi:10.59671/sd7vq

Association between dog and cat ownership with cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4401665145 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInterciencia · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDalian Science and Technology Innovation Fund
KeywordsMeta-analysisDiseaseAssociation (psychology)MedicineInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Numerous studies have described the correlation of pet ownership with cardiovascular diseases, with dog and cat ownership emerging as the predominant forms of pet companionship. Nevertheless, the studies that have examined how pet ownership affects cardiovascular diseases are lacking. Consequently, this systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to investigate associations between owning a dog or cat and all-cause mortality and the risk of cardiovascular diseases and mortality.\nMethods: The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were comprehensively searched for identifying observational publications before August 14, 2023, that investigated the potential relationship between ownership of dogs or cats and cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular disease, encompassing myocardial infarction and stroke. The outcomes were explored with unadjusted, accessible relative risk values and adjusted hazard ratio values. Additionally, this work employed the random-effects model for analysis. Meanwhile, the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed to assess study quality.\nResults: We included 11 articles, comprising 3,940,200 subjects with an average 9.82-year follow-up. In unadjusted models, dog ownership decreased all-cause mortality by 30 percent (relative risk (RR) 0.70; 95%CI,0.60-0.82) and cardiovascular mortality by 24 percent (RR,0.76; 95%CI,0.69-0.84) in the general population compared with not owning a dog. Moreover, the correlation with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR), 0.98; 95%CI, 0.86-1.12) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.78-1.07) was non-significant after adjusting for confounding factors. Nonetheless, dog ownership was slightly related to cardiovascular disease risk (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99). Cat ownership was not significantly correlated with all-cause mortality (RR, 0.95; 95%CI, 0.85-1.05; hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.98-1.12), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66-1.01; hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.69-1.11), and cardiovascular disease risk (HZ, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.57-1.22) among the general population. However, when considering only articles with over 10-year follow-up, cat ownership was associated with cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60-0.88; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63-0.99). Additionally, owning cats and dogs led to reduced cardiovascular mortality in cardiovascular disease patients (HR, 0.81; 95%CI, 0.78-0.83).\nConclusion: In the general population, dog ownership is weakly related to decreased cardiovascular disease risk, but not markedly related to all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality, whereas cat ownership is not associated with all-cause mortality and the risk of cardiovascular diseases but is related to the reduced cardiovascular mortality risk. Long-term pet ownership appears to reduce mortality in people with established cardiovascular diseases, yet further studies are warranted for validation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.300 · 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