Diabetes Alert Dogs (DADs): An assessment of accuracy and implications

Published:September 30, 2017DOI:


      • Comprehensive study of real-world DAD accuracy using continuous glucose monitoring.
      • First study to assess DAD accuracy during day and nighttime.
      • Discusses methodological issues and implications relevant to DAD research and use.



      To test the accuracy of Diabetes Alert Dogs (DADs) by comparing recorded alerts to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device readings during waking and sleeping hours.


      14 individuals (7 adults with type 1 diabetes and 7 youth with type 1 diabetes/parents) who owned DADs for ≥6 mos wore masked CGM devices over a several-week period while recording DAD alerts electronically and in paper diaries.


      During waking hours, sensitivity scores across participants were 35.9% for low BG events and 26.2% for high BG events. DAD accuracy was highly variable with 3/14 individual dogs performing statistically higher than chance. Sensitivity scores were lower during sleep hours of the person with diabetes (22.2% for low BG events and 8.4% for high BG events). DAD accuracy during sleeping hours was also highly variable, with 1/11 individual dogs performing statistically better than chance. Rate of change analyses indicated that DADs were responding to absolute BG level, rather than rapid shifts in glucose levels.


      In this study the majority of DADs did not demonstrate accurate detection of low and high BG events. However, performance varied greatly across DADs and additional studies are needed to examine factors contributing to this variability. Additionally, more research is needed to investigate the significant gap between the positive experiences and clinical outcomes reported by DAD owners and the mixed research findings on DAD accuracy.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Gonder-Frederick L.A.
        • Shepard J.A.
        • Grabman J.H.
        • Ritterband L.M.
        Psychology, technology, and diabetes management.
        Am Psychol. 2016; 71: 577
        • Petry N.M.
        • Wagner J.A.
        • Rash C.J.
        • Hood K.K.
        Perceptions about professionally and non-professionally trained hypoglycemia detection dogs.
        Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2015; 109: 389-396
        • Dehlinger K.
        • Tarnowski K.
        • House J.L.
        • Los E.
        • Hanavan K.
        • Bustamante B.
        • et al.
        Can trained dogs detect a hypoglycemic scent in patients with type 1 diabetes?.
        Diabetes Care. 2013; 36 (e98-9)
        • Hardin D.S.
        • Anderson W.
        • Cattet J.
        Dogs can be successfully trained to alert to hypoglycemia samples from patients with type 1 diabetes.
        Diabetes Ther. 2015; 6: 509-517
        • Gonder-Frederick L.A.
        • Grabman J.H.
        • Shepard J.A.
        • Tripathi A.V.
        • Ducar D.M.
        • McElgunn Z.R.
        Variability of diabetes alert dog accuracy in a real-world setting.
        J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017; (doi: 1932296816685580)
        • Los E.A.
        • Ramsey K.L.
        • Guttmann-Bauman I.
        • Ahmann A.J.
        Reliability of Trained Dogs to Alert to Hypoglycemia in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes.
        J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016; (doi: 1932296816666537)
        • Gonder-Frederick L.A.
        • Ducar D.
        • Grabman J.H.
        • Shepard J.
        Diabetes alert dogs: a review of the industry [Abstract].
        Diabetes. 2014; 63: A223
        • Swets J.
        Signal detection and recognition by human observers.
        Wiley, New York1964
      1. Swets J. Signal detection theory and ROC analysis in psychology and diagnostics: Collected papers. Hillsdale, N.J., England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.; 1996.

        • American Diabetes Association
        Standards of medical care in diabetes—2017.
        Diabetes Care. 2017; 40: S48-56
        • Schmelzeisen-Redeker G.
        • Schoemaker M.
        • Kirchsteiger H.
        • Freckmann G.
        • Heinemann L.
        • del Re L.
        Time delay of CGM sensors: relevance, causes, and countermeasures.
        J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015; 9: 1006-1015
        • Stanislaw H.
        • Todorov N.
        Calculation of signal detection theory measures.
        Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1999; 31: 137-149
        • Clarke W.
        • Kovatchev B.
        Statistical tools to analyze continuous glucose monitor data.
        Diabetes Technol The. 2009; 11: S45-S54
        • Nickerson R.S.
        Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises.
        Rev Gen Psychol. 1998; 2: 175
        • Harmon-Jones E.
        • Harmon-Jones C.
        Cognitive dissonance theory after 50 years of development.
        Soc Psychol (Gott). 2007; 38: 7-16
        • Miller K.M.
        • Beck R.W.
        • Bergenstal R.M.
        • Goland R.S.
        • Haller M.J.
        • McGill J.B.
        • et al.
        T1D Exchange Clinic Network. Evidence of a strong association between frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels in T1D exchange clinic registry participants.
        Diabetes Care. 2013; 36: 2009-2014
        • Schütt M.
        • Kern W.
        • Krause U.
        • Busch P.
        • Dapp A.
        • Grziwotz R.
        • et al.
        Is the frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose related to long-term metabolic control? Multicenter analysis including 24500 patients from 191 centers in Germany and Austria.
        Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2006; 114: 384-388
      2. US Food and Drug Administration: Approval Order: Dexcom G5 Mobile Continuous Glucose Monitoring System. PI20005. Department of Health and Human Services, Silver Spring, MD; 2016.