Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29124059›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2017

Evaluation of Three Hydration Strategies in Detection Dogs Working in a Hot Environment.

Cynthia M Otto, Elizabeth Hare, Jess L Nord, Shannon M Palermo, Kathleen M Kelsey, Tracy A Darling, Kasey Schmidt, Destiny Coleman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Individual preferences for scented water bowls in dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Cynthia M OttoDepartment of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Elizabeth HarePenn Vet Working Dog Center, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Jess L NordDepartment of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Shannon M PalermoDepartment of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Kathleen M KelseyPenn Vet Working Dog Center, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Tracy A DarlingDepartment of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Kasey SchmidtCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, United States.
Destiny ColemanDepartment of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physical activity in hot environments can increase the risk of heat stress or heat stroke in dogs. Heat tolerance is influenced by acclimatization to the environment, physical fitness, and hydration state. Three common strategies to promote hydration in working dogs are free access to water (W), oral electrolyte solutions (OESs), and administration of subcutaneous fluids (SQs). None of these methods have been compared for safety or efficacy in a working environment. In a cross-over design, seven vehicle-screening canines were randomly assigned to each of the three hydration strategies during working shifts at the Sarita, TX checkpoint. Physical, behavioral, and biochemical parameters were collected before, during, and after a work shift (mean 5.7 ± 0.8 h). Dogs were given 10 mL/kg oral W, 10 mL/kg chicken flavored OES, or 15 mL/kg of SQs initially followed by controlled access to W or OES. The dogs drank 15.61 ± 4.47 mL/kg/h of W and OES when in the OES group, compared to 7.04 ± 3.42 and 5.56 ± 4.40 mL of W, for the W and SQ groups, respectively. The median environmental temperature was 84.8°F (29.3°C). The median humidity was 70%. Based on mixed effects linear modeling, dogs in the OES and SQ groups had significantly higher total CO

Indexed as

behaviorcanineelectrolytesheat stresshydrationsearchsodium

Identifiers

PMID29124059
PMCPMC5662554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.