Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29739469›Full record

ReviewVeterinary research2018

Biomarkers for monitoring intestinal health in poultry: present status and future perspectives.

Richard Ducatelle, Evy Goossens, Fien De Meyer, Venessa Eeckhaut, Gunther Antonissen, Freddy Haesebrouck, Filip Van Immerseel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 145 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
145citing 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

145 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A NEW FOCUS ON FIBER.Poultry science · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Veterinary sciences · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

85 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

7 authors.

Richard DucatelleDepartment of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium. Richard.Ducatelle@ugent.be.ORCID 0000-0002-3721-872X
Evy GoossensDepartment of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Fien De MeyerDepartment of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Venessa EeckhautDepartment of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Gunther AntonissenDepartment of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Freddy HaesebrouckDepartment of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Filip Van ImmerseelDepartment of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intestinal health is determined by host (immunity, mucosal barrier), nutritional, microbial and environmental factors. Deficiencies in intestinal health are associated with shifts in the composition of the intestinal microbiome (dysbiosis), leakage of the mucosal barrier and/or inflammation. Since the ban on growth promoting antimicrobials in animal feed, these dysbiosis-related problems have become a major issue, especially in intensive animal farming. The economical and animal welfare consequences are considerable. Consequently, there is a need for continuous monitoring of the intestinal health status, particularly in intensively reared animals, where the intestinal function is often pushed to the limit. In the current review, the recent advances in the field of intestinal health biomarkers, both in human and veterinary medicine are discussed, trying to identify present and future markers of intestinal health in poultry. The most promising new biomarkers will be stable molecules ending up in the feces and litter that can be quantified, preferably using rapid and simple pen-side tests. It is unlikely, however, that a single biomarker will be sufficient to follow up all aspects of intestinal health. Combinations of multiple biomarkers and/or metabarcoding, metagenomic, metatranscriptomic, metaproteomic and metabolomic approaches will be the way to go in the future. Candidate biomarkers currently are being investigated by many research groups, but the validation will be a major challenge, due to the complexity of intestinal health in the field.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomarkersChickensFecesIntestinesPoultryTurkeysBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID29739469
PMCPMC5941335

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.