ArticleEpidemiology and infection2020
Prevalence of
Article in Epidemiology and infection, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of whole-herd vaccination on a caprine coxiellosis outbreak: a longitudinal study ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Spatial Modelling of Environmental Risk Factors Influencing Schmallenberg Virus Exposure in German Sheep.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2026Article
- Metabarcoding analysis of the microbiota in flocks naturally infected byOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Pre-purchase screening forFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- A six-year epidemiological study of selected zoonotic abortifacient agents in ovine and caprine foetuses in Türkiye.Epidemiology and infection · 2024Article
- First Evidence ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Co-exposure to Anaplasma spp., Coxiella burnetii and tick-borne encephalitis virus in sheep in southern Germany.Acta veterinaria Scandinavica · 2023Article
- Modelling Human Brucellosis Based on Infection Rate and Vaccination Coverage of Sheep and Goats.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Impact ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Molecular detection of Coxiella burnetii in small ruminants and genotyping of specimens collected from goats in Poland.BMC veterinary research · 2021Article
- Seroprevalence and Risk Factors ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Increasing awareness for tick-borne encephalitis virus using small ruminants as suitable sentinels: Preliminary observations.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Concept of an Active Surveillance System for Q Fever in German Small Ruminants-Conflicts Between Best Practices and Feasibility.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- Risk factors for an infection withEpidemiology and infection · 2020Article
- Comparison ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Prevalence ofEpidemiology and infection · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedPrevalence of2020
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A prevalence study was conducted on German sheep flocks including goats if they cohabitated with sheep. In addition, a novel approach was applied to identify an infection at the herd-level before lambing season with preputial swabs, suspecting venereal transmission and ensuing colonisation of preputial mucosa with Coxiella (C.) burnetii. Blood samples and genital swabs were collected from breeding males and females after the mating season and were analysed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) respectively. In total, 3367 animals were sampled across 71 flocks. The true herd-level prevalence adjusted for misclassification probabilities of the applied diagnostic tests using the Rogan-Gladen estimator for the prevalence estimate and a formula by Lang and Reiczigel (2014) for the confidence limits, ranged between 31.3% and 33% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 17.3-45.5) detected by the ELISA and/or qPCR. Overall 26-36.6% (95% CI 13-56.8) were detected by ELISA, 13.9% (95% CI 4.5-23.2) by the qPCR and 7.9-11.2% (95% CI 0.08-22.3) by both tests simultaneously. The range of results is due to data obtained from literature with different specifications for test quality for ELISA. Among eight farms with females shedding C. burnetii, three farms (37.5%) could also be identified by preputial swabs from breeding sires. This indicates less reliability of preputial swabs if used as a single diagnostic tool to detect C. burnetii infection at the herd-level.
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.