ArticleAustralian veterinary journal2022
Relative perceptions of prevalence, impact and importance of photosensitisation in Australian livestock: A survey of veterinarians, livestock traders and livestock producers.
Article in Australian veterinary journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo investigate the relative differences in the perceptions and awareness of outbreaks of photosensitisation in Australian livestock stakeholders, including veterinarians, livestock traders and producers.
methodsA questionnaire was developed and circulated to livestock veterinarians, producers and traders in Australia via email addresses obtained from public access sources. The questionnaire was designed to evaluate participants' awareness and perception of health, welfare, and production issues associated with outbreaks of photosensitisation and towards the incidence and importance of photosensitisation in livestock.
resultsOne hundred and twenty-eight online responses were received in total. Nearly half of the respondents (49.0%) indicated they would encounter 1-3 outbreaks annually. The majority of veterinarian and livestock producers stated that outbreaks of photosensitisation were common and economically important, with cattle and sheep being equally considered as susceptible species to this condition, and secondary (hepatogeneous) photosensitisation is the most common type.
conclusionThis survey confirms the anecdotal evidence that photosensitisation in livestock in Australia is commonly encountered by veterinarians and livestock producers. However, there is no industry-wide common acceptance of the issue, broader opinions should be canvassed when considering impacts on stakeholders regarding photosensitisation outbreaks in livestock in Australia or abroad in the future.
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.