↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Canine scent detection of canine cancer: a feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#19 of 135)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Canine scent detection of canine cancer: a feasibility study
Published in
Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports, October 2017
DOI 10.2147/vmrr.s148594
Pubmed ID
Authors

David C Dorman, Melanie L Foster, Katherine E Fernhoff, Paul R Hess

Abstract

The scent detection prowess of dogs has prompted interest in their ability to detect cancer. The purpose of this study was to determine whether dogs could use olfactory cues to discriminate urine samples collected from dogs that did or did not have urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma (TCC), at a rate greater than chance. Dogs with previous scent training (n=4) were initially trained to distinguish between a single control and a single TCC-positive urine sample. All dogs acquired this task (mean =15±7.9 sessions; 20 trials/session). The next training phase used four additional control urine samples (n=5) while maintaining the one original TCC-positive urine sample. All dogs quickly acquired this task (mean =5.3±1.5 sessions). The last training phase used multiple control (n=4) and TCC-positive (n=6) urine samples to pro-mote categorical training by the dogs. Only one dog was able to correctly distinguish multiple combinations of TCC-positive and control urine samples suggesting that it mastered categorical learning. The final study phase evaluated whether this dog would generalize this behavior to novel urine samples. However, during double-blind tests using two novel TCC-positive and six novel TCC-negative urine samples, this dog did not indicate canine TCC-positive cancer samples more frequently than expected by chance. Our study illustrates the need to consider canine olfactory memory and the use of double-blind methods to avoid erroneous conclusions regarding the ability of dogs to alert on specimens from canine cancer patients. Our results also suggest that sample storage, confounding odors, and other factors need to be considered in the design of future studies that evaluate the detection of canine cancers by scent detection dogs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 30%
Student > Master 6 22%
Other 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 7 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 August 2019.
All research outputs
#3,108,448
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports
#19
of 135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,042
of 331,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 135 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them