Olfactory detection of human odorant signatures in Covid patients by trained dogs
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The objective of the study was to verify the ability of specially trained dogs to detect the odour of people ill with COVID-19 and, at the same time, to use the outcome of this research in the future, whether in combatting a similar pandemic or in the field of medicine in the shape of a biological detector in uncovering different diseases. Our key assumption was that the disease will change the active odour signature of the individuals just like other diseases (TBC, malaria, tumours, etc.). The pilot study was conducted in two places, based on the same protocolar methods, and it included four specially trained detection dogs in total. For the first phase of the project, we obtained 156 positive and 72 negative odour samples primarily from a hospital. Each detection dog involved in the study was imprinted with the smell samples of Covid-positive people. The first experiment only involved two dogs. With the other two dogs, the phase of imprinting a specific smell was longer, possibly because these dogs were burdened with previous training. During a presentation of 100 randomised positive samples, the experimental dogs showed a 95% reliability rate. Data from this pilot study show that specially trained dogs are able to detect and identify the odour samples of people infected with the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.12.21258827: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable They were uncastrated males – a German Shepherd, a Giant Schnauzer, a Border Collie and a Jagdterrier. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka…
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.12.21258827: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable They were uncastrated males – a German Shepherd, a Giant Schnauzer, a Border Collie and a Jagdterrier. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
