ArticlePorcine health management2018
Field evaluation of a ready-to-use combined
Article in Porcine health management, 2018. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immunogenicity and efficacy of a Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae/porcine circovirus type 2 combination vaccine against experimental Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae infection in pigs.Veterinary research · 2026Article
- Speculative Review on the Feasibility of Porcine Circovirus 2 Elimination.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Field Evaluation of a Ready-to-Use Porcine Circovirus Type 2 andVeterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Efficacy Studies against PCV-2 of a New Trivalent Vaccine including PCV-2a and PCV-2b Genotypes andVaccines · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn practice, field evaluation of vaccine efficacy in individual herds is often based on a historical comparison of productivity data following initiation of vaccination. Being biased by time, this study design highly contrasts the more controlled, parallel-group design used for most initial vaccine efficacy studies but offers the possibility of including a larger number of animals and herds. As an important add-on to previous findings in controlled studies, the objective of this study was to evaluate the field efficacy of the ready-to-use combination vaccine Porcilis® PCV M Hyo (MSD Animal Health) by an observational historical study design using routinely generated herd productivity data.
resultsData on mortality, average daily weight gain and feed conversion rate were collected as yearly averages for one year prior to and one year after implementation of Porcilis® PCV M Hyo vaccination from 20 nursery and 23 finishing herds. When comparing pre- and post-vaccination periods, the average improvements in productivity data amounted to - 0.4 percentage points for mortality (
conclusionIn these 20 nursery and 23 finishing herds, previous findings from parallel-group vaccination studies concerning average daily weight gain for finishers were confirmed. Additionally, a significant effect on mortality for both nursery and finishing herds was demonstrated in this evaluation based on routinely generated herd productivity data.
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.