Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30845954›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2019

Risk factors for new bovine brucellosis infections in Colombian herds.

Liliana Cárdenas, Mario Peña, Oscar Melo, Jordi Casal

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Bovine brucellosis - a comprehensive review.The veterinary quarterly · 2021
    Review
  17. Seroepidemiology of bovine brucellosis in Colombia's preeminent dairy region, and its potential public health impact.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2020
    Article
  18. Investigation ofMicroorganisms · 2020
    Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Liliana CárdenasAnimal Medicine and Health Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Campus of The Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain. zlilianac@yahoo.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0535-484X
Mario PeñaAnimal Health Department, Colombian Veterinary service, Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario-ICA, 11161, Bogotá, Colombia.
Oscar MeloThe Statistics Department, Faculty of Science, National University of Colombia, 11001, Bogotá, D.C, Colombia.
Jordi CasalAnimal Medicine and Health Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Campus of The Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain.
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESInstituto Colombiano Agropecuario · COUniversidad Nacional de Colombia · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBovine brucellosis is a zoonotic disease that causes substantial economic losses and has a strong impact on public health. The main objective of this paper is to determine the risk factors for new infections of Brucella abortus on Colombian cattle farms previously certified as being free of brucellosis. A case-control study was conducted by comparing 98 cases (farms certified as brucellosis-free for three or more years but became infected) with 93 controls (farms that remained brucellosis-free during at least the previous three years). The farms were matched by herd size and geographical location (municipality). Information was obtained via a questionnaire completed by veterinary officers through a personal interview with the herd owners.

resultsTwo-thirds of the herds (67%) were dairy herds, 16% were beef herds, and 17% were dual-purpose (beef and milk) herds. After exploratory univariate analysis, all explanatory variables with a p-value of ≤0.20 were included in a logistic regression model using the forward stepwise method to select the model with the best goodness of fit. The significant risk factors were the replacement of animals from farms not certified as brucellosis-free compared to replacement from certified brucellosis-free farms (OR = 4.84, p-value < 0.001) and beef cattle farms compared to dairy cattle farms (OR = 3.61, p-value = 0.017). When herds with and without artificial insemination were compared, it was observed that farms that used natural breeding with bulls from non-certified herds had a higher risk than farms using artificial insemination (OR = 2.45, p-value = 0.037), but when the bulls came from brucellosis-free farms, farms with natural breeding were less affected (OR = 0.30, p-value = 0.004) than farms using artificial insemination, whether with frozen semen from certified brucellosis-free herds or fresh semen from uncontrolled herds. The latter is commonly sold to neighbouring farms.

conclusionsThe government should make efforts to inform farmers about the risks involved in the introduction of semen and replacement heifers from farms that are not certified as brucellosis-free and to establish measures to control these practices.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimalsBreedingBrucella abortusBrucellosis, BovineCattleColombiaCryopreservationDairyingFemaleInsemination, ArtificialMaleRisk FactorsSemen PreservationBovine brucellosis infectionBrucella-free herdsColombiaRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID30845954
PMCPMC6404332
OpenAlexW2930847500

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.