Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10816831›Full record

ArticleThe Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne2000

Epidemiological study of Yersinia enterocolitica in swine herds in Québec.

J Pilon, R Higgins, S Quessy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. ZoonoticVeterinary sciences · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Distribution of pathogenic Yersinia enterocolitica in China.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2009
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

J PilonDépartement de pathologie et microbiologie, Faculté de médecine vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada.
R Higgins
S Quessy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objectives of this study were the identification of the different contamination sources of Yersinia enterocolitica, as well as the determination of the prevalence and the distribution of the different genotypes in swine herds. The owners of 20 farms, located in the Richelieu-Yamaska region, agreed to participate in the study. Each farm was visited a minimum of 5 times between May and October 1997, and, at each visit, 20 environmental and 10 fecal samples were collected. Yersinia enterocolitica isolates were identified, serotyped, and submitted to a genetic characterization by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. The correlation coefficient (0.61) between prevalence in environment and in feces was significant (P = 0.004). Among the 153 positive samples, 93.5% belonged to serotype 0:3. The comparison of PFGE profiles revealed that all environmental Y. enterocolitica isolates had a profile identical to that of isolates recovered in feces from the corresponding farms. Also, when the genetic profiles of isolates recovered from feces collected at the first visit were compared with the profiles of isolates obtained from the subsequent visits, the same profile was observed on every farm. We concluded that environment does not represent the main source of contamination of swine by Y. enterocolitica and that, in most instances, the same strain persists in a barn from one production lot to another.

Indexed as

Yersinia enterocoliticaAnimal HusbandryAnimalsDisease OutbreaksDNA, BacterialEnvironmentPrevalenceQuebecSwineSwine DiseasesYersinia InfectionsDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID10816831
PMCPMC1476258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.