Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34438891›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021

Comparison of Gut Microbiota of 96 Healthy Dogs by Individual Traits: Breed, Age, and Body Condition Score.

Inhwan You, Min Jung Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

77 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Effects of Complementary Feed with Postbiotics Derived fromAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A NovelMicroorganisms · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Inhwan YouDepartment of Research and Development, Mjbiogen Corp., 144 Gwangnaru-ro, Seongdong-gu, Seoul 14788, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1484-7013
Min Jung KimDepartment of Research and Development, Mjbiogen Corp., 144 Gwangnaru-ro, Seongdong-gu, Seoul 14788, Korea.

Funding

Rural Development Administration, South Korea #PJ015274022021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since dogs are part of many peoples' lives, research and industry related to their health and longevity are becoming a rising topic. Although gut microbiota (GM) is a key contributor to host health, limited information is available for canines. Therefore, this study characterized GM according to individual signatures (e.g., breed, age, and body condition score-BCS) of dogs living in the same environment. Fresh fecal samples from 96 healthy dogs were analyzed by sequencing the V3-V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene. The major microbial phyla were Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Fusobacteria, Proteobacteria, and Actinobacteria. In the comparison by breeds, relative abundance of Fusobacterium was significantly differed. Interestingly,

Indexed as

agebody condition scorebreedcompanion animaldogFusobacterium perfoetensgut microbiota

Identifiers

PMID34438891
PMCPMC8388711

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.