ArticleThe Veterinary record2022
Descriptive analysis of national bovine viral diarrhoea test data in England (2016-2020).
Article in The Veterinary record, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Between-country differences in the psychosocial profiles of British cattle farmers.The Veterinary record · 2026Article
- Trust and professional relationships drive participation in passive cattle health surveillance among Dutch farmers and veterinarians.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Descriptive analysis of national bovine viral diarrhoea test data in England (2016-2023).The Veterinary record · 2025Article
- Environmental sustainability and ruminant production: A UK veterinary perspective.The Veterinary record · 2024Review
- Descriptive analysis of national bovine viral diarrhoea test data in England (2016-2020).The Veterinary record · 2022Article
- A Metapopulation Model for Preventing the Reintroduction of Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus to Naïve Herds: Scotland Case Study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) causes substantial economic losses to the cattle industry; however, control and eradication can be achieved by identifying and removing persistently infected cattle from the herd. Each UK nation has separate control programmes. The English scheme, BVDFree, started in 2016 and is voluntary.
methodsWe analysed the test results submitted to BVDFree from 5847 herds between 2016 and 2020.
resultsIn 2020, 13.5% of beef breeders and 20.0% of dairy herds that submitted tests had at least one positive (virus/antibody) test result. Although lower than in previous years, there was no clear trend in the proportion of positive tests over time. In virus testing herds, 0.4% of individual tests were positive in 2020, and 1.5% of individual tests were positive in BVDV-positive virus testing herds. Dairy herds and larger herds were more likely to join BVDFree, and dairy herds were also more likely to virus test than beef breeder herds. Larger herds, herds that used virus testing and herds that had BVDV-positive test results were more likely to continue submitting tests to BVDFree.
conclusionsThe findings provide a benchmark for the status of BVDV control in England; continued analysis of test results will be important to assess progress towards eradication.
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.