ArticleCommunications biology2021
The detection dogs test is more sensitive than real-time PCR in screening for SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Communications biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sniffer dogs performance is stable over time in detecting COVID-19 positive samples and agrees with the rapid antigen test in the field.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Public perception of medical detection dogs and other COVID-19 testing strategies.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Reduction of Biosensor False Responses and Time Delay Using Dynamic Response and Theory-Guided Machine Learning.ACS sensors · 2023Article
- β-Propiolactone (BPL)-inactivation of SARS-Co-V-2: In vitro validation with focus on saliva from COVID-19 patients for scent dog training.Journal of virological methods · 2023Review
- Interactions between Humans and Dogs during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Recent Updates and Future Perspectives.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Is diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection dogs reduced -due to virus variation- over the time?Applied animal behaviour science · 2023Article
- Sniffing out safety: canine detection and identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection from armpit sweat.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- The use of mantrailing dogs in police and judicial context, future directions, limits and possibilities - A law review.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2023Review
- In search of COVID-19: The ability of biodetection canines to detect COVID-19 odours from clinical samples.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2022Article
- Canine real-time detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the context of a mass screening event.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by Canine Olfaction: A Pilot Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Article
- Expert considerations and consensus for using dogs to detect human SARS-CoV-2-infections.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by canine olfaction.PloS one · 2022Article
- The Use and Potential of Biomedical Detection Dogs During a Disease Outbreak.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- The Potential Use of Volatile Biomarkers for Malaria Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Canine olfactory detection and its relevance to medical detection.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Review
- Discrimination of SARS-CoV-2 Infections From Other Viral Respiratory Infections by Scent Detection Dogs.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In January 2020, the coronavirus disease was declared, by the World Health Organization as a global public health emergency. Recommendations from the WHO COVID Emergency Committee continue to support strengthening COVID surveillance systems, including timely access to effective diagnostics. Questions were raised about the validity of considering the RT-PCR as the gold standard in COVID-19 diagnosis. It has been suggested that a variety of methods should be used to evaluate advocated tests. Dogs had been successfully trained and employed to detect diseases in humans. Here we show that upon training explosives detection dogs on sniffing COVID-19 odor in patients' sweat, those dogs were able to successfully screen out 3249 individuals who tested negative for the SARS-CoV-2, from a cohort of 3290 individuals. Additionally, using Bayesian analysis, the sensitivity of the K9 test was found to be superior to the RT-PCR test performed on nasal swabs from a cohort of 3134 persons. Given its high sensitivity, short turn-around-time, low cost, less invasiveness, and ease of application, the detection dogs test lends itself as a better alternative to the RT-PCR in screening for SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic individuals.
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.