ArticleIndian journal of microbiology2013
Microbiological identification and analysis of Swine lungs collected from carcasses in Swine farms, china.
Article in Indian journal of microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global prevalence of classical swine fever in domestic pigs: an integrative systematic review and meta-analysis.Tropical animal health and production · 2026Pooled it
- Review of the speculative role of co-infections in Streptococcus suis-associated diseases in pigs.Veterinary research · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The primary objective of this 3 years study was to determine the prevalence of porcine pathogens of the lungs of swine in swine farms in southern China. A total of 5,420 samples were collected from 200 swine farms. The bacterium that was most commonly isolated was Streptococcus suis, with 10.24 % of the samples being positive, 114 lungs (2.1 %) were positive for pseudorabies virus and 263 (4.85 %) were positive for classical swine fever virus; much lower than positive for PRRSV (15.1 %, p = 0.023) and PCV2 (13.8 %, p = 0.038). lungs that were positive for PRRSV and/or PCV-2 have significantly increased odds of being positive for any of the S. suis (9.79 vs. 0.44 %, p = 0.003).
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.