The recorded study summary reports 45 accepted feedings out of 46 observations: 97.8% combined acceptance over two days in 23 dogs. It measured short-term acceptance, not dental outcomes.
How the trial was run
The Nova Pet Advisory trial is dated October 1, 2026. Dogs were fed at home in an owner-reported, single-bowl, unblinded design. The study summary describes dogs aged 3–16 years, weighing 13–100 lb, across more than 15 breeds. Study dose bands were 1.75 g, 3.5 g and 5.25 g.
Owners knew they were adding the powder. There was no blinded control group or paired plain-kibble bowl. The 46 observations came from the same 23 dogs on two days; they are not 46 independent dogs.
The reported results
| Measure | Recorded result |
|---|---|
| Combined acceptance, immediate + delayed | 45/46 observations, 97.8% |
| Immediate acceptance | About 87% overall; 83% on day one and 91% on day two |
| Refusals | One feeding observation on day one; none on day two |
| Adverse events | None reported during the two-day observation period |
The recorded refusal involved powder concentrated on one side of a meal. The owner reported acceptance the next day when it was distributed evenly. This is a practical observation from one dog, not proof that even sprinkling prevents every refusal.
What it supports
The result is encouraging evidence that dogs in this small panel generally accepted food containing the powder in the short term. It helps answer “will dogs eat a meal with this added?” more directly than an ingredient list can.
What it does not establish
- That dogs prefer it to plain kibble or another powder.
- That it increases food intake or treats poor appetite.
- That acceptance persists over weeks or months.
- That it reduces breath odor, plaque, tartar or gum inflammation.
- That all dogs will tolerate it, or that long-term safety is established.
- Acceptance or safety of a proposed 7 g dose; that amount was not tested.
About this published summary
This page is Pup Choice’s summary of its recorded study results and methodology. It is not a peer-reviewed publication; the original report and individual observation sheets are not hosted here. For questions about the study documentation, contact Pup Choice. We do not compare this observed feeding-acceptance rate with refusal mentions in competitor reviews: the denominators are different.