ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2022
Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome prevalence and processing fluids use for diagnosis in United States breeding herds.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing PRRSV Detection: The Impact of Sample Processing and Testing Strategies on Tongue Tips.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Swine Practitioner Practices on Oral Fluid Sampling in U.S. Swine Farms: A Nationwide Survey.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Processing fluids have been recently adopted by the U.S. swine industry as a breeding herd PRRS monitoring tool due to their increased representativeness of animals within the herd. Here, we use the Morrison Swine Health Monitoring Project (MSHMP) database, representative of ~50% of the U.S. swine breeding herd, to describe processing fluids submissions for PRRS diagnosis and their relation to PRRS prevalence and time to stability over time between 2009 and 2020. Methods: An ecological time series Poisson regression modeling the number of status 1 farms and weekly percentage of processing fluids submissions for PRRS diagnosis was done. Time to stability was calculated for sites that detected a PRRS outbreak within the study period and modeled through a proportional hazards mixed effect survival model using production system as a random-effect factor and epiweek as a panel variable. Results: Processing fluids diagnosis submissions increased starting in 2017. The difference between each year's highest and lowest weekly prevalence averaged 10.9% between 2009 and 2017, whereas it averaged 5.0% in 2018-2020 period. Each year's lowest weekly prevalence ranged from 11.3 to 19.5% in 2009-2017 and from 22.4 to 29.2% in 2018-2020. We also detected an increasing proportion of breeding sites that did not reach stability within 1 year of reporting an outbreak (chi-square for trend Discussion: Altogether, the temporal concurrence of processing fluids used for PRRS virus monitoring suggests that the adoption of this sampling strategy may help explain the changes observed in PRRS status 1 prevalence since 2018, although further studies are still needed.
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.