ArticleJournal of veterinary research2020
Characterisation of Porcine Enteropathogenic
Article in Journal of veterinary research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Agglutination of Escherichia coli, Clostridium perfringens, and Salmonella enterica through competitive exclusion using potassium chloride with gum arabic.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2025Article
- Antibiotic resistance, virulence gene, phylogenetic group and genetic diversity ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEnteropathogenic MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 457 faecal samples were collected, from which 1,286
resultsA total of 42 strains (3.26%) belonged to atypical EPEC, of which, 15 (35.71%, and 2.29% of the 654 strains from this farm type) were isolated from organised and 27 (64.29%, and 4.27% of the 632 strains from this farm type) from unorganised farms; further, 5 (11.90% of the EPEC strains and 1.51% of the 330 strains from this breed) were isolated from the indigenous breeds and 37 (88.10%, and 3.87% of the 956 strains from this breed) from crossbred piglets. Serogroups O111 (11.9%) and O118 (7.14%) were the most prevalent of the 10 present. Sequence analysis of a length of the
conclusionThe study highlighted the association of EPEC with piglet's diarrhoea in northeastern India. EPEC isolates belonged to many serotypes and phenotypically all were multi-drug resistant with close genetic homology.
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.