ArticleDiabetes research and clinical practice2017
Diabetes Alert Dogs (DADs): An assessment of accuracy and implications.
Article in Diabetes research and clinical practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Hypoglycaemia detection and prediction techniques: A systematic review on the latest developments.Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews · 2021Pooled it
- What Is the Role of Diabetic Alert Dogs in Glycemic Monitoring for Individuals with Type 1 Diabetes? A Scoping Review.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Collection of triatomines from sylvatic habitats by a Trypanosoma cruzi-infected scent detection dog in Texas, USA.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
- Canine Olfaction: Physiology, Behavior, and Possibilities for Practical Applications.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Review
- Technological Ecological Momentary Assessment Tools to Study Type 1 Diabetes in Youth: Viewpoint of Methodologies.JMIR diabetes · 2021Article
- Dogs demonstrate the existence of an epileptic seizure odour in humans.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- An Owner-Independent Investigation of Diabetes Alert Dog Performance.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo test the accuracy of Diabetes Alert Dogs (DADs) by comparing recorded alerts to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device readings during waking and sleeping hours.
methods14 individuals (7 adults with type 1 diabetes and 7 youth with type 1 diabetes/parents) who owned DADs for ≥6 mos wore masked CGM devices over a several-week period while recording DAD alerts electronically and in paper diaries.
resultsDuring waking hours, sensitivity scores across participants were 35.9% for low BG events and 26.2% for high BG events. DAD accuracy was highly variable with 3/14 individual dogs performing statistically higher than chance. Sensitivity scores were lower during sleep hours of the person with diabetes (22.2% for low BG events and 8.4% for high BG events). DAD accuracy during sleeping hours was also highly variable, with 1/11 individual dogs performing statistically better than chance. Rate of change analyses indicated that DADs were responding to absolute BG level, rather than rapid shifts in glucose levels.
conclusionsIn this study the majority of DADs did not demonstrate accurate detection of low and high BG events. However, performance varied greatly across DADs and additional studies are needed to examine factors contributing to this variability. Additionally, more research is needed to investigate the significant gap between the positive experiences and clinical outcomes reported by DAD owners and the mixed research findings on DAD accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.