ArticleTropical animal health and production2017
Safety of vaccination against brucellosis with the rough strain in pregnant cattle.
Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low Seroprevalence of Bovine Brucellosis in Communal Areas of Limpopo Province, South Africa.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of the RB51 vaccine in controlling brucellosis in adult beef cows.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- A review of three decades of use of the cattle brucellosis rough vaccine Brucella abortus RB51: myths and facts.BMC veterinary research · 2023Review
- Role of Brucella abortus Biovar 3 in the Outbreak of Abortion in a Dairy Cattle Herd Immunized with Brucella abortus Iriba Vaccine.Archives of Razi Institute · 2020Article
- An Overview of Brucellosis in Cattle and Humans, and its Serological and Molecular Diagnosis in Control Strategies.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brucellosis is an infectious and contagious disease that profoundly impacts public health. However, in many countries, disease prevention is restricted to the vaccination of calves, and there is no prophylactic strategy for pregnant heifers and cows. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of the rough strain vaccine against brucellosis in pregnant cattle. Crossbred cows (N = 96) at three gestational periods (early, mid, or late pregnancy) were randomly allocated into the vaccine treatment group or to the control group. We then compared the percentage of pregnancies reaching full term, live calves 60 days after delivery, and seropositive calves. There was no effect of vaccination in any of the gestational periods on the evaluation endpoints. In conclusion, vaccination against brucellosis with the rough strain is safe for pregnant cattle at all gestational periods.
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.