To have or not to have a pet for better health?
<h4>Background</h4>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 o...
Main Authors: | Leena K Koivusilta, Ansa Ojanlatva |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2006-12-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000109 |
Similar Items
-
Pets for pediatric transplant recipients: To have or not to have
by: Lucía Platero, et al.
Published: (2022-09-01) -
Ideal cardiovascular health metrics have better identification of arthritis
by: Yuxiang Wang, et al.
Published: (2024-01-01) -
Could we have better occupational health guidelines, please?
by: Jos Verbeek
Published: (2018-09-01) -
Phenotypic Selection in Ornamental Breeding: It's Better to Have the BLUPs Than to Have the BLUEs
by: Heike Molenaar, et al.
Published: (2018-11-01) -
Haves and have nots must find a better way: The case for open scientific hardware.
by: André Maia Chagas
Published: (2018-09-01)