ArticlePloS one2023
A stochastic compartmental model to simulate intra- and inter-species influenza transmission in an indoor swine farm.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanistic Models of Influenza Transmission in Commercial Swine Populations: A Systematic Review.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Pooled it
- Estimating the risk of zoonotic transmission of swine influenza A variant during agricultural fairs in the United States: a mathematical modeling.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Common in swine production worldwide, influenza causes significant clinical disease and potential transmission to the workforce. Swine vaccines are not universally used in swine production, due to their limited efficacy because of continuously evolving influenza viruses. We evaluated the effects of vaccination, isolation of infected pigs, and changes to workforce routine (ensuring workers moved from younger pig batches to older pig batches). A Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Recovered model was used to simulate stochastic influenza transmission during a single production cycle on an indoor hog growing unit containing 4000 pigs and two workers. The absence of control practices resulted in 3,957 pigs [0-3971] being infected and a 0.61 probability of workforce infection. Assuming incoming pigs had maternal-derived antibodies (MDAs), but no control measures were applied, the total number of infected pigs reduced to 1 [0-3958] and the probability of workforce infection was 0.25. Mass vaccination (40% efficacious) of incoming pigs also reduced the total number of infected pigs to 2362 [0-2374] or 0 [0-2364] in pigs assumed to not have MDAs and have MDAs, respectively. Changing the worker routine by starting with younger to older pig batches, reduced the number of infected pigs to 996 [0-1977] and the probability of workforce infection (0.22) in pigs without MDAs. In pigs with MDAs the total number of infected pigs was reduced to 0 [0-994] and the probability of workforce infection was 0.06. All other control practices alone, showed little improvement in reducing total infected pigs and the probability of workforce infection. Combining all control strategies reduced the total number of infected pigs to 0 or 1 with a minimal probability of workforce infection (<0.0002-0.01). These findings suggest that non-pharmaceutical interventions can reduce the impact of influenza on swine production and workers when efficacious vaccines are unavailable.
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.