ArticlePloS one2019
The nasal and oropharyngeal microbiomes of healthy livestock workers.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- WORKbiota: A Systematic Review about the Effects of Occupational Exposure on Microbiota and Workers' Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Animal farming and the oral microbiome in the Agricultural Health Study.Environmental research · 2025Article
- Nasopharyngeal microbiota is influenced by agricultural air pollution in individuals with and without COPD.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Hypertonic Saline Nasal Rinse Intervention: Immunomodulatory Effects in Dairy Workers.Journal of agromedicine · 2025Article
- Occupational farm work activities influence workers' indoor home microbiome.Environmental research · 2024Article
- Article
- Effects of microbes in pig farms on occupational exposed persons and the environment.AMB Express · 2023Article
- Therapeutic effect of biosynthetic gold nanoparticles on multidrug-resistantVeterinary world · 2021Article
- Dynamic distribution of nasal microbial community in yaks (Bos grunniens) at different ages.Tropical animal health and production · 2021Article
- The Effect of Immunobiotic/Psychobiotic Lactobacillus acidophilus Strain INMIA 9602 Er 317/402 Narine on Gut Prevotella in Familial Mediterranean Fever: Gender-Associated Effects.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2021Article
- Composition of nasal bacterial community and its seasonal variation in health care workers stationed in a clinical research laboratory.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Little information exists on the microbiomes of livestock workers. A cross-sectional, epidemiological study was conducted enrolling 59 participants (26 of which had livestock contact) in Iowa. Participants were enrolled in one of four ways: from an existing prospective cohort study (n = 38), from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources Animal Feeding Operations database (n = 17), through Iowa county fairs (n = 3), and through snowball sampling (n = 1). We collected swabs from the nares and oropharynx of each participant to assess the microbiome via 16s rRNA sequencing. We observed livestock workers to have greater diversity in their microbiomes compared to those with no livestock contact. In the nares, there were 27 operational taxonomic units found to be different between livestock workers and non-livestock workers with the greatest difference seen with Streptococcus and Proteobacteria. In the oropharynx, livestock workers with swine exposure were more likely to carry several pathogenic organisms. The results of this study are the first to characterize the livestock worker nasal and oropharyngeal microbiomes.
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.