Learning DevelopmentNCT07168460
Social Working Dogs Support to Children With Problematic School Absence
A study testing Dog-assisted support and Special education teacher support in people with Learning Development and Quality of Life, run by Uppsala University at 1 site in Sweden.
Trial summary
The purpose of this project is to investigate whether trained social service dogs can increase students' school attendance and school motivation, and ultimately contribute to students reaching the basic learning goals. Main research questions are: 1. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 8 to 16 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Learning Development, Quality of Life, School Attendance
- What is being tested?
- Dog-assisted support and Special education teacher support
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 64 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSweden
- Study dates
- 13 Sep 2022to 14 Feb 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 8 to 16 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Children from grades 3-9 with at least 15% absence from school during at least one semester and receiving no additional support.
Who cannot join
- Children who had 50%-100% absenteeism for more than a year
- Children who were severely allergic to dogs or who had previous negative experiences with dogs
- Children from grades 1-3
- Children who had previously participated in an intervention with a social working dog.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Sweden1 site
Uppsala University & Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Uppsala
About this study
Official title: Social Working Dogs Support To Children With Problematic School Absence
The purpose of this project is to investigate whether trained social service dogs can increase students' school attendance and school motivation, and ultimately contribute to students reaching the basic learning goals. Main research questions are:
- What are the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of having social service dogs support at schools to improve learning outcome and school attendance in students with problematic school absence?
- What are the risks to the health and well-being of those social working dogs when they work in the school environment as well as the challenges in bringing dogs to the schools?
Researchers compared the intervention group which consisted of students supported by social working dogs, to the control group of students supported by special education teachers. Participants were assigned to each group randomly. Students from each group met the support teams for 30 minutes per session, twice per week for 10-12 weeks. During the intervention, children had physical contact with dogs as much as they wished and on consideration of dogs' welfare. The dog handler carried out some pedagogical tasks, such as children reading to the dog while the dog was next to the child or when its head was on the child's lap. The dog handlers documented the process of each session and observed the children on their educational tasks. Children in the control group met special education teachers and received pedagogical tasks involving Swedish, mathematics, etc. Similar to the dog team, special education teachers documented the process and observed the performance of children's educational tasks.
Read the detailed description
The aim of this project is to investigate whether an intervention delivered by trained social working dog teams can increase school attendance among school-age children in grades 3-9, contribute to children achieving the basic learning goals, and improve health-related quality of life. The study design is an individually-randomized controlled trial with two arms - intervention and control. Randomization is conducted at the individual level within each school through lottery. Schools in Sweden were contacted by sending out flyers. Principals who wanted their schools to participate in the project contacted the project manager. The selection criteria for inclusion in the project are children from grades 3-9 with at least 15% absence from school during at least one semester, receiving no additional support.The criteria for exclusion are as follows: children who had 50%-100% absenteeism for more than a year; children who were severely allergic to dogs or who had previous negative experiences with dogs; and children from grades 1-3. Additionally, children who had previously participated in an intervention with a social working dog were excluded, as the potential impact on the results is unknown. Participation was voluntary, and written consent forms from both children and parents/ guardians were obtained. The study population includes school-age children from grades 3-9 in Sweden. A sample size of around 64 school-going children with a 1:1 allocation was allocated within the schools into control and intervention groups. Primary outcome data were collected at the following time points: T0 - pre-intervention (the whole semester before intervention), T1 - the whole semester during intervention, and T2 - the whole semester after intervention. Secondary outcome data were collected at T0 - pre-intervention, T1 - immediately post intervention, T2 - 3 months post intervention, and T3 - 6 months post intervention.
- Conditions
- Learning Development, Quality of Life, School Attendance
- Being tested
- Dog-assisted support, Special education teacher support
- Keywords
- problematic school absence, school attendance, learning achievement, quality of life
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Dog-assisted supportBehavioural
Children in the intervention group received dog-assisted support for 30 minutes per session, twice per week for 10-12 weeks. The process began with children meeting school dog with dog handlers either at their home or at school. During the intervention, children had physical contact with dogs as much as they wished and on consideration of dogs' welfare. The dog handler carried out some pedagogical tasks, such as children reading to the dog while the dog was next to the child or when its head was on the child's lap. The dog handler documented the process of each session in a protocol filled in after each session and observed the children on their educational tasks.
Special education teacher supportBehavioural
Children in the control group met special education teachers and received pedagogical tasks involving Swedish, mathematics, etc. Similar to the dog team, special education teachers documented the process and observed the performance of children's educational tasks.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Social working dogs team | Experimental | Children are randomized to this social working dogs team to receive dog-assisted educational tasks such as reading. Receives: Behavioral: Dog-assisted support |
| Special education teachers team | Active comparator | Children are randomized to this active control group to perform educational tasks with the support of special educational teachers. Receives: Behavioral: Special education teacher support |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
School absenteeism
Children's weekly school attendance (%) were retrieved from school registration records on children's attendance.
Measured: T0-The whole semester before intervention (5 months pre-intervention), T1-The whole semester during intervention (5 months during intervention), and T2 - The whole semester after intervention (5 months after intervention).
Learning achievement
Children's attainment of basic learning goals was measured through grades obtained on two subjects: Swedish and Mathematics. Children were graded as pass (Godkänd) or fail (Undergodkänd) in Swedish and Mathematics. Data were retrieved through school reports.
Measured: T0-The whole semester before intervention (5 months pre-intervention), T1-The whole semester during intervention (5 months during intervention), and T2 - The whole semester after intervention (5 months after intervention).
Secondary outcomes (1)
Children's health-rated quality of life (HRQOL)
Children's health-rated quality of life (HRQOL) of both control and intervention classes was measured using the Child Health Utility 9 Dimensions (CHU9D), a generic preference-based HRQOL measure for use in children and youth.
Measured: T0 - pre-intervention, T1 - immediately post intervention, T2 - 3 months post intervention, and T3 - 6 months post intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Sep 2025
- Study start13 Sep 2022
- Primary completion14 Feb 2024
- Study completion14 Feb 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Learning DevelopmentStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Uppsala UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 64 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Uppsala University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Lena Lidfors, Doctorate in Ethology, Principal investigator, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07168460
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2022-01706-01
- Other IDs
- N2021-0022
- Status last verified
- Sep 2025
- First submitted
- 1 Sep 2025
- Last updated
- 11 Sep 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: IDP sharing plan has not been decided as they are sensitive data, and that we need approval from our university GDPR and legal department to do so.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Social Working Dogs Support To Children With Problematic School Absence
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07168460
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2022-01706-01
- Conditions
- Learning Development, Quality of Life, School Attendance
- Keywords
- problematic school absence, school attendance, learning achievement, quality of life
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 64 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Uppsala UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
- Study start
- 13 Sep 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 14 Feb 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 14 Feb 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 Sep 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this project is to investigate whether trained social service dogs can increase students' school attendance and school motivation, and ultimately contribute to students reaching the basic learning goals. Main research questions are:
- What are the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of having social service dogs support at schools to improve learning outcome and school attendance in students with problematic school absence?
- What are the risks to the health and well-being of those social working dogs when they work in the school environment as well as the challenges in bringing dogs to the schools?
Researchers compared the intervention group which consisted of students supported by social working dogs, to the control group of students supported by special education teachers. Participants were assigned to each group randomly. Students from each group met the support teams for 30 minutes per session, twice per week for 10-12 weeks. During the intervention, children had physical contact with dogs as much as they wished and on consideration of dogs' welfare. The dog handler carried out some pedagogical tasks, such as children reading to the dog while the dog was next to the child or when its head was on the child's lap. The dog handlers documented the process of each session and observed the children on their educational tasks. Children in the control group met special education teachers and received pedagogical tasks involving Swedish, mathematics, etc. Similar to the dog team, special education teachers documented the process and observed the performance of children's educational tasks.
Detailed description
The aim of this project is to investigate whether an intervention delivered by trained social working dog teams can increase school attendance among school-age children in grades 3-9, contribute to children achieving the basic learning goals, and improve health-related quality of life. The study design is an individually-randomized controlled trial with two arms - intervention and control. Randomization is conducted at the individual level within each school through lottery. Schools in Sweden were contacted by sending out flyers. Principals who wanted their schools to participate in the project contacted the project manager. The selection criteria for inclusion in the project are children from grades 3-9 with at least 15% absence from school during at least one semester, receiving no additional support.The criteria for exclusion are as follows: children who had 50%-100% absenteeism for more than a year; children who were severely allergic to dogs or who had previous negative experiences with dogs; and children from grades 1-3. Additionally, children who had previously participated in an intervention with a social working dog were excluded, as the potential impact on the results is unknown. Participation was voluntary, and written consent forms from both children and parents/ guardians were obtained. The study population includes school-age children from grades 3-9 in Sweden. A sample size of around 64 school-going children with a 1:1 allocation was allocated within the schools into control and intervention groups. Primary outcome data were collected at the following time points: T0 - pre-intervention (the whole semester before intervention), T1 - the whole semester during intervention, and T2 - the whole semester after intervention. Secondary outcome data were collected at T0 - pre-intervention, T1 - immediately post intervention, T2 - 3 months post intervention, and T3 - 6 months post intervention.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Social working dogs team | Experimental | Behavioral: Dog-assisted supportChildren are randomized to this social working dogs team to receive dog-assisted educational tasks such as reading. |
| Special education teachers team | Active comparator | Behavioral: Special education teacher supportChildren are randomized to this active control group to perform educational tasks with the support of special educational teachers. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 8 to 16 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Children from grades 3-9 with at least 15% absence from school during at least one semester and receiving no additional support.
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Children who had 50%-100% absenteeism for more than a year
- Children who were severely allergic to dogs or who had previous negative experiences with dogs
- Children from grades 1-3
- Children who had previously participated in an intervention with a social working dog.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Dog-assisted supportChildren in the intervention group received dog-assisted support for 30 minutes per session, twice per week for 10-12 weeks. The process began with children meeting school dog with dog handlers either at their home or at school. During the intervention, children had physical contact with dogs as much as they wished and on consideration of dogs' welfare. The dog handler carried out some pedagogical tasks, such as children reading to the dog while the dog was next to the child or when its head was on the child's lap. The dog handler documented the process of each session in a protocol filled in after each session and observed the children on their educational tasks. | Behavioural | Social working dogs team |
| Special education teacher supportChildren in the control group met special education teachers and received pedagogical tasks involving Swedish, mathematics, etc. Similar to the dog team, special education teachers documented the process and observed the performance of children's educational tasks. | Behavioural | Special education teachers team |
Primary outcome
School absenteeism
Time frame: T0-The whole semester before intervention (5 months pre-intervention), T1-The whole semester during intervention (5 months during intervention), and T2 - The whole semester after intervention (5 months after intervention).
Children's weekly school attendance (%) were retrieved from school registration records on children's attendance.
Learning achievement
Time frame: T0-The whole semester before intervention (5 months pre-intervention), T1-The whole semester during intervention (5 months during intervention), and T2 - The whole semester after intervention (5 months after intervention).
Children's attainment of basic learning goals was measured through grades obtained on two subjects: Swedish and Mathematics. Children were graded as pass (Godkänd) or fail (Undergodkänd) in Swedish and Mathematics. Data were retrieved through school reports.
1 secondary outcome
Children's health-rated quality of life (HRQOL)
Time frame: T0 - pre-intervention, T1 - immediately post intervention, T2 - 3 months post intervention, and T3 - 6 months post intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Sep 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. IDP sharing plan has not been decided as they are sensitive data, and that we need approval from our university GDPR and legal department to do so.
Related trials for Learning Development
Recruiting
A Center Based Early Intervention Program For Preschoolers With Developmental Disorders
Development Disorder, Child, Developmental Disability
RecruitingEarly Phase 1
Aprepitant for the Treatment of CLIFAHDD
CLIFAHDD, Congenital Contractures of the Limbs and Face, Hypotonia, and Developmental Delay
Enrolling by invitation
Brain Stimulation Paired With Structured Language Learning in Adults
Language Development, Learning
Recruiting
Advancing Skills Through Consultation, Education, and Novel Technologies
PTSD - Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
Recruiting
Personalization of Visual Characters and Text-to-Speech (TTS) to Support Learning in Students With Reading Difficulties
Developmental Dyslexia, Reading Problem
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Lena Lidfors, Doctorate in Ethology principal investigator
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Dog-assisted support and Special education teacher support in people with Learning Development and Quality of Life, run by Uppsala University at 1 site in Sweden.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Sep 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Sweden. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
School absenteeism (time frame: T0-The whole semester before intervention (5 months pre-intervention), T1-The whole semester during intervention (5 months during intervention), and T2 - The whole semester after intervention (5 months after intervention).). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 Sep 2025.