CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 68Human-Animal Interaction StudiesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsArt Therapy and Mental Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effectiveness of an Animal-Assisted Therapy Program in an Inpatient Psychiatric Unit

Holcomb, Ralph, Meacham, Mary·1989·Anthrozoös
DOI 10.2752/089279389787057902
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Proper diagnostic assessment in an inpatient psychiatric setting requires observation of patients under various conditions. Group activities such as animal-assisted therapy (A-AT) can provide an excellent opportunity for assessment—but only if the patient chooses to attend. Retrospective analysis of attendance at a major metropolitan inpatient psychiatric unit indicates that over the course of two years (N= 23 months) the A-AT group attracted the highest percentage of inpatients voluntarily choosing to attend an occupational therapy group. It was found that A-AT was the most effective of all groups offered in attracting isolated individuals regardless of diagnosis. The authors conclude that A-AT is an effective tool for diagnostic observation and assessment.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2752/089279389787057902

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Four studies included in Nimer and Lundahl's review compared AAIs with active interventions rather than a wait-list control group, demonstrating that AAI was as effective as the alternative intervention, and in some cases more effective.

    “Importantly, four studies included in the review compared aaIs with active interventions rather than a wait-list control group, demonstrating that aaI was as effective as the alternative intervention, and in some cases more effective (holcomb and meacham 1989; haughie, milne and Elliot 1992; Bernstein, Friedmann and malaspina 2000;marr et al. 2000).”

    From A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Animal-Assisted Therapy on Psychosocial Outcomes (2015) · cites this paper as holcomb and meacham 1989

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Beck A., 1985, Veterinary Clinics of North America, Small Animal Practice, 15, 2
  2. Beck A., 1984, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 184, 414, 10.2460/javma.1984.184.04.414 · DOI
  3. 10.2466/pr0.1986.58.1.63 · DOI
  4. Brickle C., 1980, International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 12, 2
  5. Corson S.A., 1977, Comparative Psychology, 18, 61, 10.1016/S0010-440X(77)80008-4 · DOI
  6. Klein C., 1986, International Journal of Group Psychotherapy.
  7. Robb S., 1980, Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 6, 4, 10.3928/0098-9134-19801201-07 · DOI
  8. Searles, H. 1960.The non-human environment.New York: International Universities Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Holcomb, R., & Meacham, M.
Venue
Anthrozoös
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1989-02-01
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
259-264
ISSN
  • 0892-7936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1753-0377
DOI
10.2752/089279389787057902
OpenAlex
W1991374618
Cited by
68
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Anthrozoös (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Art Therapy and Mental Health
Keywords
animal-assisted therapy, psychiatric ward, diagnostic assessment, occupational therapy groups, group activities, patient attendance, social isolation, psychiatric diagnosis

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