Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26711302›Full record

ArticlePreventive veterinary medicine2016

Porcine epidemic diarrhea virus introduction into the United States: Root cause investigation.

Aaron Scott, Brian McCluskey, Monica Brown-Reid, Dan Grear, Paul Pitcher, Greg Ramos, Denise Spencer, Aaron Singrey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive veterinary medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Anti-viral triterpenes: a review.Phytochemistry reviews : proceedings of the Phytochemical Society of Europe · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Risk and Mitigation of African Swine Fever Virus in Feed.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

8 authors.

Aaron ScottUS Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services/Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave, Fort Collins, CO, USA. Electronic address: aaronescott@aphis.usda.gov.
Brian McCluskeyUS Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services/Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Monica Brown-ReidUS Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services/Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Dan GrearUS Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services/Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Paul PitcherUS Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services/Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Greg RamosUS Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services/Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Denise SpencerUS Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services/Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Aaron SingreyUS Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services/Veterinary Services, 2150 Centre Ave, Fort Collins, CO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) was identified in the United States in the spring of 2013, and professionals from many parts of the U.S. swine industry responded rapidly to understand and control the newly emerging disease. In less than two months, the disease had spread to more than 200 herds in thirteen states. Experts from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) engaged in laboratory diagnostics, analytic support, epidemiology expertise, and data management to facilitate the effort. By 2014, a great deal had been learned about the disease; however, the question of how it entered the United States remained unanswered. In 2014, USDA formed an investigative group to address the question and leverage current knowledge with resources and partnerships not readily available to non-federal investigators. The group formed collaborations with other government and non-government organizations and individuals, and followed many avenues of inquiry; ultimately arriving at a small number of scenarios that describe possible mechanisms for PED introduction. For a scenario to be plausible, it had to explain: contamination of a person or product in the source country, its transit and entry to the United States, rapid dispersal across a wide geographic area, and exposure/infection of pigs. It had to be compatible with findings of swine herd investigations and research studies. Potential products had to have been imported legally during the time prior to the beginning of the epidemic, or delivered to the United States through prohibited channels. Follow-up studies were initiated to gather more evidence for the most plausible scenarios. Of the scenarios, flexible intermediate bulk containers ("feed totes") used to transport bulk feed serving as fomites for movement of PED virus provided the simplest explanation for the accumulated findings of the investigation.

Indexed as

Animal FeedAnimalsCoronavirus InfectionsDiarrheaPorcine epidemic diarrhea virusSwineSwine DiseasesTransportationUnited StatesEpidemiologyFeedFlexible intermediate bulk containerOutbreak investigationPorcine epidemic diarrheaToteVirus transmission

Identifiers

PMID26711302
PMCPMC7114364

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.