CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65Human-Animal Interaction StudiesAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesPhysical Activity and Health

To Have or Not To Have a Pet for Better Health?

Open access
Koivusilta, Leena K., Ojanlatva, Ansa·2006·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0000109PMC PMC1762431
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pet ownership is thought to have health benefits, but not all scientific explorations have been founded on proper applications of representative samples or statistically correct methodologies. Databanks have been too small for proper statistical analyses; or, instead of a random sample, participation has been voluntary. The direction of causality has been evaluated incorrectly or control of relevant factors noted deficient. This study examined the associations of pet ownership with perceived health and disease indicators by taking into account socio-demographic background factors together with health risk factors, including exercise. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The present study used baseline data from the 15-year Health and Social Support Study (the HeSSup Study). The Finnish Population Register Centre was used to draw population-based random samples stratified according to gender and four age groups (20-24, 30-34, 40-44, and 50-54 years). A total of 21,101 working-aged Finns responded to the baseline survey questionnaire of the 15-year HeSSup Study in 1998. Ordinal and binary logistic regression was used to analyze the cross-sectional data. Pet ownership was associated with poor rather than good perceived health. BMI surfaced as the risk factor most strongly associated with pet ownership. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Pet owners set in their ways and getting older were found to have a slightly higher BMI than the rest. Additional research is needed for the testing of hypotheses involving effects of pet ownership with various health dimensions within population groups that are composed of different kinds of background characteristics.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0000109

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some authors doubt the generalized pet-effect on human mental and physical health because of conflicting results and lack of publication of negative results.

    “Some authors doubt the generalized pet-effect on human mental and physical health because of conflicting results that are prevalent in this area of science and the lack of publication of negative results [13,104,105,106].”

    From A One Health Perspective on the Human-Companion Animal Relationship with Emphasis on Zoonotic Aspects. (2020) · cites this paper as [104]

    The Introduction and Discussion (no page numbers in our copy) describe mixed findings and methodological weaknesses, supporting doubt about a generalized health benefit from pet ownership. They do not attribute that doubt to a lack of publication of negative results; searches for that point found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. [1]Dobson A 1998 Cardiovascular health, exercise and pet ownership – a critical review and research agenda. Paper prepared for “Animals, Community Health and Public Policy”, a symposium by the National Centre for Health Promotion, University of Sydney. November, 27 [www document]. Available: http://achp.health.usyd.edu.au/pets/dobson.html. Accessed February 15, 2005
  2. [2]Serpell JA 1991 Beneficial aspects of pet ownership on some aspects of human health and behavior. J R Soc Med 84 717 720 1774745 PMC1295517
  3. [4]Headey B Grabka M 2003 Pet ownership is good for your health and saves public expenditure too: Australian and German longitudinal evidence. Conference: the 20th Anniversary of the German Socio-Economic Panel, Berlin. July [www document] Available: http://www.diw.de/deutsch/dasinstitut/abteilungen/ldm/archiv/ar2003/soep2003/papers/headey_grabka.pdf. Accessed March 1, 2005
  4. [5]Siegel JM 1990 Stressful life events and the use of physician services among the elderly: the moderating effects of pet ownership. J Pers Soc Psychol 58 1081 1086 2391640
  5. [7]Anderson WP Reid CM Jennings GL 1992 Pet ownership and risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Med J Aust 157 298 301 1435469
  6. [9]Raina P Waltner-Toews D Bonnett B Woodward C Abernathy T 1999 Influence of companion animals on the physical and psychological health of older people: an analysis of a one-year longitudinal study. J Am Geriatr Soc 47 323 329 10078895
  7. [11]Headey B 1999b Do pet owners enjoy better health? Results from the German Socio-Economic Panel. Animal, Community Health and Public Policy Symposium, Sydney [www document] Available: http://www.achp.health.usyd.edu.au/pets/proceeding.html#dpoebh. Accessed March 16, 2005
  8. [12]Headey B 2003 Pet ownership: good for health? Med J Aust 179 460 461 14583073
  9. [14]Manson JE Tosteson H Ridger PM Satterfield S Hebert P 1992 The primary prevention of myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 326 1406 1416 1533273
  10. [15]Friedmann E Thomas SA Stein PK Kleiger RE 2003 Relation between pet ownership and heart rate variability in patients with healed myocardial infarcts. Am J Cardiol 91 718 721 12633806
  11. [16]Simons LA McCallum J Simons J 1997 Pet ownership and future health. Med J Aust 167 231 232 9293277
  12. [17]Jorm AF Jacomb PA Christensen H Henderson S Korten AE 1997 Impact of pet ownership on elderly Australians' use of medical services: an analysis using Medicare data. Med J Aust 166 376 377 9137285
  13. [18]Parslow RA Jorm AF 2003 Pet ownership and risk factors for cardiovascular disease: another look. Med J Aust 179 466 468 14583076
  14. [19]Parslow RA Jorm AF Christensen H Rodgers B Jacomb P 2005 Pet ownership and health in older adults: findings from a survey of 2551 community-based Australians aged 60–64. Gerontology 51 40 47 15591755
  15. [20]Allen KM Blascovich J 1991 Presence of human friends and pet dogs as moderators of autonomic responses to stress in women. J Pers Soc Psychol 61 582 589 1960650
  16. [21]Kingwell BA Lomdahl A Anderson WP 2001 Presence of a pet dog and human cardiovascular responses to mild mental stress. Clin Auton Res 11 313 317 11758798
  17. [22]Beck AM Katcher AH 1984 A new look at pet-facilitated psychotherapy. J Am Vet Med Assoc 184 414 421 6365867
  18. [23]Wright JC Moore D 1982 Comments on animal companions and one-year survival of patients after discharge. Public Health Rep 97 380 381 7111660 PMC1424342
  19. [24]Korkeila K Suominen S Ahvenainen J Ojanlatva A Rautava P 2001 Non-response and related factors in a nation-wide health survey. Eur J Epidemiol 17 991 999 12380710
  20. [25]Kujala UM Kaprio J Sarna S Koskenvuo M 1998 Relationship of leisure-time physical activity and mortality: the Finnish twin cohort. JAMA 279 440 444 9466636
  21. [26]Virtanen P Liukkonen V Vahtera J Kivimäki M Koskenvuo M 2003 Health inequalities in the workforce: the labour market core-periphery structure. Int J Epidemiol 32 1015 1021 14681267
  22. [28]Hosmer DW Lemeshow S 2000 Applied Logistic Regression. New York John Wiley
  23. [30]Koskenvuo M Kaprio J Lönnqvist J Sarna S 1986 Social factors and the gender difference in mortality. Soc Sci Med 23 605 609 3764510
  24. [31]Bauman AE Russell SJ Furber SE Dobson AJ 2001 The epidemiology of dog walking: an unmet need for human and canine health. Med J Aust 175 632 634 [www document] Available: http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/175_12_171201/bauman/bauman.html. Accessed March 1, 2005 11837871
  25. [32]Argyle M 1994 The Psychology of Social Class. London Routledge
  26. [33]Elo IT Preston SH 1996 Educational differentials in mortality: United States 1979–1985. Soc Sci Med 42 47 57 8745107
  27. [34]Winkleby MA Jatulis DE Frank E Fortmann SP 1992 Socioeconomic status and health: how education, income and occupation contribute to risk factors of cardiovascular disease. Am J Public Health 82 816 820 1585961 PMC1694190
  28. [35]Friedmann E Katcher AH Lynch JJ Thomas SA 1980 Animal companions and one year survival of patients after discharge from a coronary unit. Public Health Rep 95 307 312 6999524 PMC1422527
  29. [36]Friedmann E Thomas SA 1995 Pet ownership, social support and one-year survival after acute myocardial infarction in the Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST). Am J Cardiol 76 1213 1217 7502998
  30. [37]Friedmann E 1995 The role of pets in enhancing human wellbeing: physiological effects. Robinson I Waltham Book of Human Animal Interactions. Oxford Pergamon Press
  31. [40]Wilson EO 1984 Biophilia: the human bond with other species. Cambridge Harvard University Press
  32. [41]Frumkin H 2001 Beyond toxicity: human health and the natural environment. Am J Prev Med 20 234 240 11275453
  33. [44]Siegel JM Angulo FJ Detels R Wesch J Mullen A 1999 AIDS diagnosis and depression in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study: The ameliorating impact of pet ownership. AIDS Care 11 157 170 10474619

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Koivusilta, L. K., & Ojanlatva, A.
Affiliations
University of Turku (FI)
Corresponding author
Ojanlatva, Ansa
ORCID
Koivusilta, Leena K.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2006-12-27
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
e109
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0000109
PMC
PMC1762431
OpenAlex
W2028459521
Cited by
65
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
pet ownership, health perception, body mass index, health risk factors, physical activity, sociodemographic factors, causal direction, health benefits of pets
MeSH terms
Adult, Animals, Animals, Domestic, Human-Animal Bond, Cross-Sectional Studies, Dogs, Female, Finland, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Activity, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Body Mass Index, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review