MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Investigating the relationship between canine training classes and post-adoption return rates in North American shelters

2025· article· en· W4409885840 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

VenueApplied Animal Behaviour Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of PennsylvaniaBernice Barbour FoundationArnall Family Foundation
KeywordsPet therapyAnimal-assisted therapyHUBzeroVeterinary medicineAnimal welfarePsychologyAnimal scienceDemographyGeographyBiologyMedicineEcologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although millions of pets are adopted from shelters each year, a significant portion are returned after adoption which can have negative implications for pets and animal shelters. Previous studies indicate a strong correlation between behavioral issues and returned shelter dogs. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between attending post-adoption training classes and return rates. The study also looked at the distribution of return reasons between dogs who attended training and dogs who did not. Retrospective data between April 1st 2023 and March 31st 2024 was collected from three different shelters in North America (Seattle, WA; DeKalb, IL; Edmonton, AB). Of all the adopted dogs (n = 3325), we looked at which dogs attended training (n = 204) and used propensity score matching to generate a matched control group of dogs who did not attend training. The control group was matched based on age, sex, breed, shelter and intake type. The results showed no significant difference in return rates between dogs who attended training (8.3 %) and dogs who did not attend training (9.3 %) as analyzed by Pearson Chi Squared test ( X 2 (1) = 0.122, p = 0.727). However, of all the returned dogs, those who attended training were more likely to be returned for owner-related reasons (58.8 %), whereas dogs who did not attend training were more likely to be returned for animal-related reasons (78.9 %, X 2 (1) = 5.386, p = 0.020). While attending training classes at animal shelters may help to reduce behavioral returns, as shown by the shift in return reasons, they do not appear to reduce return rates significantly for the general shelter population. This finding provides valuable insight for shelters to improve their resource allocation. Shelters can have a more targeted approach by providing behavioral support for dogs that are at high-risk of return, thus setting those dogs up for a greater likelihood of permanent adoption. • Training classes were not associated with return rates among adopted shelter dogs. • The reasons for returned adoptions differed following training classes. • Attending training classes at animal shelters may help to reduce behavioral returns.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.308 · 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