ArticlePorcine health management2019
Prevalence of
Article in Porcine health management, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Influence of vaccination against infectious diseases on the carbon footprint of fattening pigs: a systematic review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- A low-endotoxic Salmonella vector with dual bacterial-host promoter expression of Lawsonia intracellularis antigens elicits protective immunity in a murine model.Veterinary research · 2026Article
- Lawsonia intracellularis infection induces changes in microbial community function and composition associated with reduced pig growth and feed efficiency.Animal microbiome · 2026Article
- Prevalence ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Isolation, characterization, and pathogenic mechanisms of a novelFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Immune Response of Pigs Vaccinated Against Proliferative Enteropathy and Co-Infected withAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Cross-sectional survey of risk factors for edema disease Escherichia coli (EDEC) on commercial pig farms in Germany.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Vaccination Reduces Fecal Shedding and Improves Carcass Quality in Pigs with SubclinicalVaccines · 2025Article
- Development and application of a triplex real-time PCR method for the detection ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Establishment of a TaqMan Quantitative Real-Time PCR for DetectingVeterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Risk association of Lawsonia intracellularis in commercial swine farms.Tropical animal health and production · 2025Article
- Outer Membrane Proteins as Vaccine Targets AgainstVaccines · 2025Article
- Prevalence of pathogens from clinical samples associated with porcine respiratory and digestive diseases in South Korea from 2021 to 2023.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Vaccination versus antimicrobials to prevent Porcine Proliferative Enteropathy: associated costs and effects on piglets' growth, health, and serological performance.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Porcine proliferative enteropathy: overview of disease dynamics and non-antibiotic alternatives for prevention and control strategies.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
- Detection and quantification by molecular techniques of early infection by Lawsonia intracellularis in suckling piglets.Porcine health management · 2024Article
- Development of a TaqMan-based multiplex real-time PCR for simultaneous detection of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus,Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Fecal PCR survey and genome analysis ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Alleviative Effect of Probiotic Ferment onBiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
resultsOut of the 144 herds sampled in Germany, Denmark, Spain, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, 90.3% (79.2-100.0%) contained at least one positive faecal sample on quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). Of the 6450 nursery, growing and finishing pigs of the previously mentioned herds, 26.2% (15.9-41.5%) of the animals were tested positive in faecal samples. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) results of 60 herds were 91.7% (70-100%) positive. The percentage of positive samples in these 1791 blood samples was 31.6% (20.3-51.0%). Herd prevalence did not differ significantly by qPCR or ELISA. Significant differences between the countries were found regarding: Within-herd prevalence- qPCR: Samples from Denmark were more often positive than samples of Spain or the United Kingdom. Within-herd prevalence- ELISA: Samples from Denmark were more often positive than samples from Spain and the Netherlands. Affected age category- qPCR: Nursery pigs in Denmark were more often positive and shed more genome equivalents than nursery pigs in the other countries. Concentration of detected genome equivalents- qPCR: The concentration of genome equivalents from
conclusionA widespread of
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.