Trial reportThe Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne2012
Comparison of enrofloxacin and ceftiofur sodium for the treatment of relapse of undifferentiated fever/bovine respiratory disease in feedlot cattle.
Trial report in The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of First Treatment Timing, Fatal Disease Onset, and Days from First Treatment to Death Associated with Bovine Respiratory Disease in Feedlot Cattle.Veterinary sciences · 2023Article
- Economic assessments from experimental research trials of feedlot cattle health and performance: a scoping review.Translational animal science · 2022Article
- A One Health Comparative Assessment of Antimicrobial Resistance in Generic and Extended-Spectrum Cephalosporin-ResistantMicroorganisms · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This commercial field trial compared the efficacy of enrofloxacin and ceftiofur sodium in beef cattle at high risk of developing undifferentiated fever (UF), also known as bovine respiratory disease (BRD) that received tilmicosin at feedlot arrival, were diagnosed and initially treated for UF with tilmicosin, and subsequently required a second UF treatment (first relapse). Feedlot cattle (n = 463) were randomly assigned to 2 experimental groups: ENRO or CEF. Second UF relapse, 3rd UF relapse, overall case fatality and BRD case fatality rates were lower in the ENRO group than in the CEF group (P < 0.05). There were no differences in average daily gain (allocation to re-implant date), chronicity, histophilosis case fatality or miscellaneous case fatality rates between the groups (P ≥ 0.05). A per-animal economic advantage of Can$57.08 was calculated for the ENRO group versus the CEF group. In feedlot cattle in western Canada at high risk of developing UF, it was more cost effective to administer enrofloxacin than ceftiofur sodium for treatment of UF relapse.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22753964PMC3239149W1591871625What 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.