Recently, animal-assisted interventions (AAIs), which are defined as psychological, educational, and rehabilitation support activities, have become widespread in different contexts. For many years, they have been a subject of interest in the international scientific community and are at the center of an important discussion regarding their effectiveness and the most appropriate practices for their realization. We carried out an umbrella review (UR) of systematic reviews (SRs), created for the purpose of exploring the literature and aimed at deepening the terminological and methodological aspects of AAIs. It is created by exploring the online databases PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library. The SRs present in the high-impact indexed search engines Web of Sciences and Scopus are selected. After screening, we selected 15 SRs that met the inclusion criteria. All papers complained of the poor quality of AAIs; some considered articles containing interventions that did not always correspond to the terminology they have explored and whose operating practices were not always comparable. This stresses the need for the development and consequent diffusion of not only operational protocols, but also research protocols which provide for the homogeneous use of universally recognized terminologies, thus facilitating the study, deepening, and comparison between the numerous experiences described.

Methodological and terminological issues in animal-assisted interventions: An umbrella review of systematic reviews / Santaniello, A.; Dice, F.; Carratu, R. C.; Amato, A.; Fioretti, A.; Menna, L. F.. - In: ANIMALS. - ISSN 2076-2615. - 10:5(2020), p. 759. [10.3390/ani10050759]

Methodological and terminological issues in animal-assisted interventions: An umbrella review of systematic reviews

Santaniello A.
Conceptualization
;
Dice F.
Methodology
;
Carratu R. C.
Data Curation
;
Amato A.
Data Curation
;
Fioretti A.
Writing – Review & Editing
;
Menna L. F.
Supervision
2020

Abstract

Recently, animal-assisted interventions (AAIs), which are defined as psychological, educational, and rehabilitation support activities, have become widespread in different contexts. For many years, they have been a subject of interest in the international scientific community and are at the center of an important discussion regarding their effectiveness and the most appropriate practices for their realization. We carried out an umbrella review (UR) of systematic reviews (SRs), created for the purpose of exploring the literature and aimed at deepening the terminological and methodological aspects of AAIs. It is created by exploring the online databases PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library. The SRs present in the high-impact indexed search engines Web of Sciences and Scopus are selected. After screening, we selected 15 SRs that met the inclusion criteria. All papers complained of the poor quality of AAIs; some considered articles containing interventions that did not always correspond to the terminology they have explored and whose operating practices were not always comparable. This stresses the need for the development and consequent diffusion of not only operational protocols, but also research protocols which provide for the homogeneous use of universally recognized terminologies, thus facilitating the study, deepening, and comparison between the numerous experiences described.
2020
Methodological and terminological issues in animal-assisted interventions: An umbrella review of systematic reviews / Santaniello, A.; Dice, F.; Carratu, R. C.; Amato, A.; Fioretti, A.; Menna, L. F.. - In: ANIMALS. - ISSN 2076-2615. - 10:5(2020), p. 759. [10.3390/ani10050759]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
animals-10-00759.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Documento in Post-print
Licenza: Dominio pubblico
Dimensione 459.63 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
459.63 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11588/806684
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 29
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 26
social impact