Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35143504›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Limitations of bacterial culture, viral PCR, and tulathromycin susceptibility from upper respiratory tract samples in predicting clinical outcome of tulathromycin control or treatment of bovine respiratory disease in high-risk feeder heifers.

Jeffrey J Sarchet, John P Pollreisz, David T Bechtol, Mitchell R Blanding, Roger L Saltman, Patrick C Taube

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jeffrey J SarchetZoetis, Parsippany-Troy Hills, New Jersey, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6325-090X
John P PollreiszZoetis, Parsippany-Troy Hills, New Jersey, United States of America.
David T BechtolAgri Research Center, Canyon, Texas, United States of America.
Mitchell R BlandingZoetis, Parsippany-Troy Hills, New Jersey, United States of America.
Roger L SaltmanZoetis, Parsippany-Troy Hills, New Jersey, United States of America.
Patrick C TaubeZoetis, Parsippany-Troy Hills, New Jersey, United States of America.
Zoetis (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A cross-sectional prospective cohort study including 1026 heifers administered tulathromycin due to high risk of clinical signs of bovine respiratory disease (BRD), measured poor association between BRD clinical outcomes and results of bacterial culture and tulathromycin susceptibility from BRD isolates of deep nasopharyngeal swabs (DNS) and adequate association with viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results from nasal swabs. Isolation rates from DNS collected on day-0 and at 1st BRD-treatment respectively were: Mannheimia haemolytica (10.9% & 34.1%); Pasteurella multocida (10.4% & 7.4%); Mycoplasma bovis (1.0% & 36.6%); and Histophilus somni (0.7% & 6.3%). Prevalence of BRD viral nucleic acid on nasal swabs collected exclusively at 1st BRD-treatment were: bovine parainfluenza virus type-3 (bPIV-3) 34.1%; bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) 26.3%; bovine herpes virus type-1 (BHV-1) 10.8%; and bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV) 54.1%. Increased relative risk, at 95% confidence intervals, of 1st BRD-treatment failure was associated with positive viral PCR results: BVDV 1.39 (1.17-1.66), bPIV-3 1.26 (1.06-1.51), BHV-1 1.52 (1.25-1.83), and BRSV 1.35 (1.11-1.63) from nasal swabs collected at 1st BRD-treatment and culture of M. haemolytica 1.23 (1.00-1.51) from DNS collected at day-0. However, in this population of high-risk feeder heifers, the predictive values of susceptible and resistant isolates had inadequate association with BRD clinical outcome. These results indicate, that using tulathromycin susceptibility testing of isolates of M. haemolytica or P. multocida from DNS collected on arrival or at 1st BRD-treatment to evaluate tulathromycin clinical efficacy, is unreliable.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBovine Respiratory Disease ComplexCattleCattle DiseasesCross-Sectional StudiesDiarrhea Viruses, Bovine ViralDisaccharidesDNA, ViralHerpesvirus 1, BovineHeterocyclic CompoundsMacrolidesMannheimia haemolyticaMicrobial Sensitivity TestsNasopharynxPasteurella multocidaAnti-Bacterial AgentsDisaccharidesDNA, ViralHeterocyclic CompoundsMacrolidesRNA, Viraltulathromycin

Identifiers

PMID35143504
PMCPMC8830659
OpenAlexW4211162527

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.