ArticleBMC veterinary research2016
Incidence of bovine neonatal pancytopenia in 243 farms in Germany.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A Functionally Different Immune Phenotype in Cattle Is Associated With Higher Mastitis Incidence.Frontiers in immunology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral research groups from different European countries have worked on the aetiopathogenesis of bovine neonatal pancytopenia (BNP) and an association between the use of the vaccine PregSure BVD (Pfizer, Germany) and the development of this haemorrhagic disease was confirmed. Because BNP is not a notifiable disease, it is difficult to obtain information on its incidence. Based on pharmacovigilance (PhV) data, which are the only officially available data at the national level, the incidence of BNP is considered low. However, voluntary reporting of the disease can lead to underreporting. To gain more insight into the incidence of BNP among the affected herds, an epidemiological study was performed, which focused on 243 farms in Germany with cases of BNP. Farmers were asked to report the occurrence of BNP, including the number of cases, which allowed calculation of incidence in the affected herds. Matching such data with the registered cases in the National PhV System (NPhVS) gave us an opportunity to assess the extent of BNP underreporting.
resultsOn 243 farms, a total of 1195 calves younger than 4 weeks with haemorrhagic diathesis were registered. In 58 % of the reports, a diagnosis of BNP was confirmed by blood analysis and or by necropsy. The number of cases observed on individual farms ranged from 1 to 80. Based on these results, the incidence of BNP on affected farms ranged from 0.3 to 15.2 % (median 2.9 %). The maximal incidence in the year with the highest number of BNP calves ranged between 0.4 and 18.6 % (median 3.3 %). Comparing the number of cases registered in the NPhVS to the numbers found in this study revealed considerable underreporting to the national database: only 44 % of the farms and 41 % of the BNP calves included in the study were registered in the NPhVS.
conclusionsIn spite of the opportunity to report BNP calves to the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut (Langen, Germany), the estimated number of undetected BNP cases is remarkably high. However, even if the revealed substantial underreporting is taken into account, the incidence of BNP is low. Nevertheless, the incidence on some affected farms is very high, resulting in considerable financial losses that should not be underestimated. Although the exact pathomechanism of BNP at the molecular level is still not known, its incidence is clearly declining following withdrawal of PregSure BVD from the market.
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.