ArticlePreventive veterinary medicine2019
Forecasting herd-level porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) frequency trends in Ontario (Canada).
Article in Preventive veterinary medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The potential application of artificial intelligence in veterinary clinical practice and biomedical research.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus (PEDV) emerged in North America in 2013. The first case of PEDV in Canada was identified on an Ontario farm in January 2014. Surveillance was instrumental in identifying the initial case and in minimizing the spread of the virus to other farms. With recent advances in predictive analytics showing promise for health and disease forecasting, the primary objective of this study was to apply machine learning predictive methods (random forest, artificial neural networks, and classification and regression trees) to provincial PEDV incidence data, and in so doing determine their accuracy for predicting future PEDV trends. Trend was defined as the cumulative number of new cases over a four-week interval, and consisted of four levels (zero, low, medium and high). Provincial PEDV incidence and prevalence estimates from an industry database, as well as temperature, humidity, and precipitation data, were combined to create the forecast dataset. With 10-fold cross validation performed on the entire dataset, the overall accuracy was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.60 - 0.75), 0.57 (95% CI: 0.49 - 0.64), and 0.55 (0.47 - 0.63) for the random forest, artificial neural network, and classification and regression tree models, respectively. Based on the cross-validation approach to evaluating predictive accuracy, the random forest model provided the best prediction.
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.