Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36271677›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2022

Fecal microbiota of horses with colitis and its association with laminitis and survival during hospitalization.

Cosette Ayoub, Luis G Arroyo, Jennifer L MacNicol, David Renaud, J Scott Weese, Diego E Gomez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Reproductive Tract Microbiota of Mares.Veterinary sciences · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Cosette AyoubDepartment of Clinical Studies, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6252-7970
Luis G ArroyoDepartment of Clinical Studies, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6007-5413
Jennifer L MacNicolDepartment of Animal Biosciences, Ontario Agricultural College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
David RenaudDepartment of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
J Scott WeeseDepartment of Pathobiology, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1896-1937
Diego E GomezDepartment of Clinical Studies, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7495-4868
University of Guelph · CA

Funding

Equine Guelph 055097
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe association of microbiota with clinical outcomes and the taxa associated with colitis in horses remains generally unknown.

objectivesDescribe the fecal microbiota of horses with colitis and investigate the association of the fecal microbiota with the development of laminitis and survival. ANIMALS: Thirty-six healthy and 55 colitis horses subdivided into laminitis (n = 15) and non-laminitis (n = 39, 1 horse with chronic laminitis was removed from this comparison) and survivors (n = 27) and nonsurvivors (n = 28).

methodsUnmatched case-control study. The Illumina MiSeq platform targeting the V4 region of the 16S ribosomal RNA gene was used to assess the microbiota.

resultsThe community membership (Jaccard index) and structure (Yue and Clayton index) were different (analysis of molecular variance [AMOVA]; P < .001) between healthy and colitis horses. The linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe; linear discriminant analysis [LDA] >3; P < .05) and random forest analyses found Enterobacteriaceae, Lactobacillus, Streptococcus, and Enterococcus enriched in colitis horses, whereas Treponema, Faecalibacterium, Ruminococcaceae, and Lachnospiraceae were enriched in healthy horses. The community membership and structure of colitis horses with or without laminitis was (AMOVA; P > .05). Enterobacteriaceae, Streptococcus, and Lactobacillus were enriched in horses with laminitis (LDA > 3; P < .05). The community membership (AMOVA; P = .008) of surviving and nonsurviving horses was different. Nonsurviving horses had an enrichment of Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas, Streptococcus, and Enterococcus (LDA >3; P < .05). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Differences in the microbiota of horses with colitis that survive or do not survive are minor and, similarly, the microbiota differences in horses with colitis that do or do not develop laminitis are minor.

Indexed as

ColitisHorse DiseasesMicrobiotaAnimalsCase-Control StudiesFecesHorsesHospitalizationStreptococcusClostridiumdiarrheaEnterobacteriaceaeLactobacillusStreptococcus

Identifiers

PMID36271677
PMCPMC9708523
OpenAlexW4307093612

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.