Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25472551›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2014

Adverse effects of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection on growth performance of Norwegian pigs - a longitudinal study at a boar testing station.

Chiek Er, Bjørn Lium, Saraya Tavornpanich, Peer Ola Hofmo, Hilde Forberg, Anna Germundsson Hauge, Carl Andreas Grøntvedt, Tore Framstad, Edgar Brun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Chiek ErNorwegian Veterinary Institute, P.O. Box 750, 0106, Oslo, Norway. chiek.er@vetinst.no.
Bjørn LiumNorwegian Veterinary Institute, P.O. Box 750, 0106, Oslo, Norway. bjorn.lium@gmail.com.
Saraya TavornpanichNorwegian Veterinary Institute, P.O. Box 750, 0106, Oslo, Norway. saraya.tavornpanich@vetinst.no.
Peer Ola HofmoNorsvin (Norwegian Pig Breeders Association), P.O. Box 504, 2304, Hamar, Oslo, Norway. peer-ola.hofmo@norsvin.no.
Hilde ForbergNorwegian Veterinary Institute, P.O. Box 750, 0106, Oslo, Norway. hilde.forberg@vetinst.no.
Anna Germundsson HaugeNorwegian Veterinary Institute, P.O. Box 750, 0106, Oslo, Norway. anna.germundsson-hauge@vetinst.no.
Carl Andreas GrøntvedtNorwegian Veterinary Institute, P.O. Box 750, 0106, Oslo, Norway. carl-andreas.grontvedt@vetinst.no.
Tore FramstadNorwegian University of Life Sciences, Campus Adamstuen, Ullevålsveien 72, 0454, Oslo, Norway. Tore.Framstad@nmbu.no.
Edgar BrunNorwegian Veterinary Institute, P.O. Box 750, 0106, Oslo, Norway. edgar.brun@vetinst.no.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfluenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection in Norwegian pigs was largely subclinical. This study tested the hypothesis that the infection causes negligible impact on pigs' growth performance in terms of feed conversion efficiency, daily feed intake, daily growth, age on reaching 100 kg bodyweight and overall feed intake. A sample of 1955 pigs originating from 43 breeding herds was classified into five infection status groups; seronegative pigs (n = 887); seropositive pigs (n = 874); pigs positive for virus at bodyweight between 33 kg and 60 kg (n = 123); pigs positive for virus at bodyweight between 61 kg and 80 kg (n = 34) and pigs positive for virus at bodyweight between 81 kg and 100 kg (n = 37). Each pig had daily recordings of feed intake and bodyweight from 33 kg to 100 kg. Marginal effects of the virus infection on the outcomes were estimated by multi-level linear regression, which accounted for known fixed effects (breed, birthdate, average daily feed intake and growth phase) and random effects (cluster effects of pig and herd).

resultsThe seropositive and virus positive pigs had decreased (P value<0.05) growth performance compared to seronegative pigs even though feed intake was not decreased. Reduced feed conversion efficiency led to lower average daily growth, additional feed requirement and longer time needed to reach the 100 kg bodyweight. The effects were more marked (P value<0.03) in pigs infected at a younger age and lasted a longer period. Despite increased feed intake observed, their growth rates were lower and they took more time to reach 100 kg bodyweight compared to the seronegative pigs.

conclusionOur study rejected the null hypothesis that the virus infection had negligible adverse effects on growth performance of Norwegian pigs.

Indexed as

Influenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeAnimalsAsymptomatic InfectionsBody WeightLongitudinal StudiesMaleNorwayOrthomyxoviridae InfectionsSwineSwine Diseases

Identifiers

PMID25472551
PMCPMC4300606

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.