Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26986832›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Failure of Passive Immune Transfer in Calves: A Meta-Analysis on the Consequences and Assessment of the Economic Impact.

Didier Raboisson, Pauline Trillat, Clélia Cahuzac

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Welfare of beef cattle.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Didier RaboissonUniversité de Toulouse, Institut National Polytechnique (INP), Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse (ENVT), UMR 1225, Interaction Hôte Agent Pathogène (IHAP), F-31076 Toulouse, France.
Pauline TrillatUniversité de Toulouse, Institut National Polytechnique (INP), Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse (ENVT), F-31076 Toulouse, France.
Clélia CahuzacUniversité de Toulouse, Institut National Polytechnique (INP), Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse (ENVT), UMR 1225, Interaction Hôte Agent Pathogène (IHAP), F-31076 Toulouse, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low colostrum intake at birth results in the failure of passive transfer (FPT) due to the inadequate ingestion of colostral immunoglobulins (Ig). FPT is associated with an increased risk of mortality and decreased health and longevity. Despite the known management practices associated with low FPT, it remains an important issue in the field. Neither a quantitative analysis of FPT consequences nor an assessment of its total cost are available. To address this point, a meta-analysis on the adjusted associations between FPT and its outcomes was first performed. Then, the total costs of FPT in European systems were calculated using a stochastic method with adjusted values as the input parameters. The adjusted risks (and 95% confidence intervals) for mortality, bovine respiratory disease, diarrhoea and overall morbidity in the case of FPT were 2.12 (1.43-3.13), 1.75 (1.50-2.03), 1.51 (1.05-2.17) and 1.91 (1.63-2.24), respectively. The mean (and 95% prediction interval) total costs per calf with FPT were estimated to be €60 (€10-109) and €80 (€20-139) for dairy and beef, respectively. As a result of the double-step stochastic method, the proposed economic estimation constitutes the first estimate available for FPT. The results are presented in a way that facilitates their use in the field and, with limited effort, combines the cost of each contributor to increase the applicability of the economic assessment to the situations farm-advisors may face. The present economic estimates are also an important tool to evaluate the profitability of measures that aim to improve colostrum intake and FPT prevention.

Indexed as

Immunity, Maternally-AcquiredAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnimals, NewbornCattleCattle DiseasesColostrumFemaleImmunization, PassiveImmunoglobulinsMaleModels, EconomicStochastic ProcessesImmunoglobulins

Identifiers

PMID26986832
PMCPMC4795751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.