The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of animal-assisted interventions on social functioning in children with autism spectrum disorder, based on evidence from randomized control trials. Included studies were articles published in English, with school aged children from 4 to 18 years with autism spectrum disorder. Databases searched were MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Zoological Record. Data extraction from included studies included demographics and sample features, interventions and controls descriptions, outcome measures, study funding and descriptive statistics. Risk of bias was assessed, considering randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, attrition, selective reporting and other sources of bias. Studies were synthesized narratively based on the animal approach taken and the use of waitlist versus active controls. Nine studies were included reporting across eight trials. Studies overall reported improvements in social functioning following equine-assisted services, with preliminary evidence suggesting improvements are sustained in the short and medium term. Insufficient evidence was available to draw conclusions on the efficacy of other animal-assisted interventions. Future research should aim to address the limitations common to included designs. Lay abstract Children with autism typically experience difficulties interacting socially with others when compared to their non-autistic peers. Establishing how effective interventions are for improving social functioning is important to help inform what should be offered to children with autism. This study reviewed how effective interventions that involved interaction with a live animal, known as animal-assisted interventions, are in improving social functioning in children with autism. A systematic search of the evidence on this topic found nine studies, which were explored for the effectiveness of animal-assisted interventions and the quality of methods used. Overall, these studies showed improvements in social functioning following equine-assisted or therapeutic horse-riding interventions, with initial evidence showing improvements are sustained in the short and medium term. However, several issues were identified, which limit the strength of any conclusions that can be drawn from this evidence. For example, in many studies people assessing the children were aware that they received the intervention or were in a control group. There was also not enough evidence available to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of other animal-assisted interventions. Future research should address the limitations that were common in the designs of these studies and investigate the potential benefit of other animal populations, such as dogs and cats.

BackgroundDifferent dementia support roles exist but evidence is lacking on which aspects are best, for whom and in what circumstance, and on their associated costs and benefits. Phase 1 of the Dementia PersonAlised Care Team programme (D-PACT), developed a post-diagnostic primary care-based intervention for people with dementia and their carers and assessed the feasibility of a trial.AimPhase 2 of the programme aims to 1) refine our programme theory on how, when and for whom the intervention works and 2) evaluate its value and impact.Design & settingA realist longitudinal mixed-methods evaluation will be conducted in urban, rural, and coastal areas across Southwest and Northwest England where low-income groups or ethnic minorities (eg, South Asian) are represented. Design was informed by patient, public and professional stakeholder input and Phase one findings.MethodHigh volume qualitative and quantitative data will be collected longitudinally from people with dementia, carers and practitioners. Analyses will comprise: 1) realist longitudinal case studies; 2) conversation analysis of recorded interactions; 3) statistical analyses of outcome and experience questionnaires; 4 a) health economic analysis examining costs of delivery; 4b) realist economic analysis of high-cost events and ‘near misses’. All findings will be synthesised using a joint display table, evidence appraisal tool, triangulation and stakeholder co-analysis.ConclusionOur realist evaluation will describe how, why and for whom the intervention leads (or not) to change over time; it also demonstrates how a non-randomised design can be more appropriate for complex interventions with similar questions or populations.