Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30050849›Full record

ReviewVeterinary medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2017

Swine brucellosis: current perspectives.

S C Olsen, F M Tatum

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Isolation of Brucella suis from cattle in India: whole genome analysis unravels potential for zoonotic transmission.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Genomic epidemiology ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Hunting for Answers: AssessingPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  18. Frontiers in immunology · 2024
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

S C OlsenInfectious Bacterial Diseases of Livestock Research Unit, National Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Ames, IA, USA, Steven.olsen@ars.usda.gov.
F M TatumInfectious Bacterial Diseases of Livestock Research Unit, National Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Ames, IA, USA, Steven.olsen@ars.usda.gov.
Agricultural Research Service · USNational Animal Disease Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

hostinfectionlivestockpathogenicitytransmissionvaccine

Identifiers

PMID30050849
PMCPMC6042558
OpenAlexW2564320982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.