Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34083934›Full record

ArticleVeterinary world2021

Comparison between five coprological methods for the diagnosis of

Juan Carlos Pinilla, Andrea Isabel Pinilla, Angel Alberto Florez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary world, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 96% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Juan Carlos PinillaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Exact, Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of Santander, Bucaramanga, Colombia.
Andrea Isabel PinillaDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Health, Industrial University of Santander, Bucaramanga, Colombia.
Angel Alberto FlorezDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Exact, Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of Santander, Bucaramanga, Colombia.
Universidad De Santander · COIndustrial University of Santander · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimMATERIALS AND

methodsFrom September to December 2019, 558 fecal samples were collected from the rectum of backyard pigs in the Bucaramanga metropolitan area, Colombia. The average age of the sampled animals was 3-4 months. Fecal samples collected were tested using the following coprological techniques: Direct examination with Lugol's iodine solution, buffered saline, centrifugation/flotation and McMaster techniques, and Ziehl-Neelsen method.

resultsThe results indicate that

conclusionIt is concluded that the most efficient method for diagnosing this parasitosis was to an association between direct examination with Lugol's iodine solution and buffered saline.

Indexed as

Balantidiumparasitepigsprotozoan

Identifiers

PMID34083934
PMCPMC8167525
OpenAlexW3154975391

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.