ArticleEpidemiology and infection2006
Differentiation between serological responses to Brucella suis and Yersinia enterocolitica serotype O:9 after natural or experimental infection in pigs.
Article in Epidemiology and infection, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preliminary Investigation Towards a Safety Tool for Swine Brucellosis Diagnosis by a Proteomic Approach Within the One-Health Framework.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Controlled Experimental Infection in Pigs with a Strain of Yersinia enterocolitica Harboring Genetic Markers for Human Pathogenicity: Colonization and Stability.Infection and immunity · 2023Article
- Disease Progression and Serological Assay Performance in Heritage Breed Pigs followingPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Development of a Multiplex Bead Assay to Detect Serological Responses toMicroorganisms · 2022Article
- MALDI-TOF MS and genomic analysis can make the difference in the clarification of canine brucellosis outbreaks.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Brucella melitensis B115-based ELISA to unravel false positive serologic reactions in bovine brucellosis: a field study.BMC veterinary research · 2020Article
- Loci Associated With Antibody Response in Feral Swine (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2020Article
- Vaccine safety studies ofVaccine: X · 2019Article
- A Serological Survey on Swine Brucellosis Using Standard Procedures, Dot Blot, and Western Blot in Finisher Pigs in Central-North Italy.Veterinary sciences · 2018Article
- Evaluation of competitive ELISA for detection of antibodies to Brucella infection in domestic animals.Croatian medical journal · 2010Article
- Improving the specificity of immunodiagnosis for porcine brucellosis.Veterinary research communications · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
False-positive serological reactions (FPSR) due to infections with Yersinia enterocolitica serotype Oratio9 (YeOratio9) are a problem in tests for brucellosis. In the present study, FPSR in classical and novel tests for brucellosis following experimental infections of pigs with YeOratio9 were compared with responses of B. suis biovar 2-inoculated pigs. FPSR were limited to 2-9 weeks post-YeOratio9 inoculation, while B. suis-infected pigs were test-positive throughout the 21-week period of investigation. Although YeOratio9-inoculated pigs exhibited FPSR in Brucella tests for a limited period of time, the serological responses in a YeOratio9-purified O-antigen indirect ELISA did not decrease accordingly. Analysis of available cross-sectional serum samples from pig herds naturally infected with YeOratio9 or B. suis biovar 2 confirmed that the observed difference in the duration of the serological responses between the two infections could be used to discriminate between herds infected with B. suis biovar 2 and YeOratio9.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.