Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22280482›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2012

The occurrence of Chlamydia spp. in pigs with and without clinical disease.

Stina Englund, Carl Hård af Segerstad, Frida Arnlund, Eva Westergren, Magdalena Jacobson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Characteristics ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Chlamydia prevalence in Polish pig herds.Epidemiology and infection · 2016
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

5 authors.

Stina EnglundNational Veterinary Institute, 751 89 Uppsala, Sweden.
Carl Hård af Segerstad
Frida Arnlund
Eva Westergren
Magdalena Jacobson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWithin the genera Chlamydia, the development of refined diagnostic techniques has allowed the identification of four species that are capable of infecting pigs. The epidemiology, clinical, and zoonotic impacts of these species are however largely unknown. The study aimed to investigate the presence of Chlamydia spp. in the intestines of growing pigs and in conjunctival swabs from finisher pigs, and relate the findings to clinical signs.

resultsBy histology, 20 of 48 pigs had intestinal lesions that may be consistent with chlamydial infection. By PCR, forty-six of the pigs were positive whereas two samples were inhibited. Sequencing of 19 DNA extracts identified these as Chlamydia suis. By immunohistochemistry, 32 of 44 samples were positive and a significant relationship was detected between macroscopically visible intestinal lesions and a high degree of infection. By real-time PCR, a significant difference was detected between pigs with and without conjunctivitis when a Ct value of 36 was employed but not when a Ct value of 38 was employed.

conclusionsChlamydia suis was demonstrated in most samples and overall, no correlation to clinical signs was detected. However, a correlation was noted between samples with a high degree of infection and the presence of clinical signs. It is possible, that the intensive pig production systems studied might predispose for the transmission and maintenance of the infection thus increasing the infectious load and the risk for disease in the pig.

Indexed as

AnimalsChlamydiaChlamydia InfectionsConjunctivaDNA, BacterialIntestinesPolymerase Chain ReactionSwineSwine DiseasesDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID22280482
PMCPMC3307427

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.