Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33088829›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2020

Selecting Dogs for Explosives Detection: Behavioral Characteristics.

Lucia Lazarowski, Lowell Paul Waggoner, Sarah Krichbaum, Melissa Singletary, Pamela Haney, Bart Rogers, Craig Angle

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The Role of Olfaction in Dogs: Evolution, Biology, and Human-Oriented Work.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Human-dog trust and cohesion within French military canine teams.Military psychology : the official journal of the Division of Military Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2025
    Article
  13. Effectiveness of marker training for detection dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

7 authors.

Lucia LazarowskiCanine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Lowell Paul WaggonerCanine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Sarah KrichbaumCanine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Melissa SingletaryCanine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Pamela HaneyCanine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Bart RogersCanine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.
Craig AngleCanine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detection dogs are widely considered the most effective and adaptive method for explosives detection. Increases in emerging sophisticated threats are accelerating the demand for highly capable explosives detection, causing a strain on available supplies of quality canines worldwide. These strains are further compounded by rigorous behavioral standards required to meet mission-specific capabilities, leading to high rates of dogs disqualified from training or deployment. Ample research has explored the behavioral characteristics important for assistance, guide, and other traditional working roles, while those corresponding to more specialized tasks such as detection of explosives are not as well-understood. In this review we aim to identify the behavioral characteristics important for operational tasks of explosives detection dogs, contrasting with that of other working roles and highlighting key differences between explosives and other types of detection dogs. Further, we review the available research on methods for assessing and selecting candidate detection dogs and make recommendations for future directions and applications to the industry. Improvements and standardization in assessment technology allowing for the identification and enhancement of behavioral characteristics will be key to advancing canine detection technology in general.

Indexed as

caninedetection dog evaluationdetection dogsexplosives detection dogsselectionworking dogs

Identifiers

PMID33088829
PMCPMC7493654

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.