Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37390128›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine

Bayesian evaluation of the accuracy of a thoracic auscultation scoring system in dairy calves with bronchopneumonia using a standard lung sound nomenclature.

Antonio Boccardo, Salvatore Ferraro, Giulia Sala, Vincenzo Ferrulli, Davide Pravettoni, Sébastien Buczinski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. CyranoseVeterinary sciences · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Antonio BoccardoDipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria e Scienze Animali (DIVAS), Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0051-6990
Salvatore FerraroDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-5567-7527
Giulia SalaDipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria e Scienze Animali (DIVAS), Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8847-5531
Vincenzo FerrulliDipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria e Scienze Animali (DIVAS), Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9426-8619
Davide PravettoniDipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria e Scienze Animali (DIVAS), Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3338-6053
Sébastien BuczinskiDépartement de Sciences Cliniques, Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8460-4885
University of Milan · ITCegep de Saint Hyacinthe · CASwedish University of Agricultural Sciences · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough thoracic auscultation (AUSC) in calves is quick and easy to perform, the definition of lung sounds is highly variable and leads to poor to moderate accuracy in diagnosing bronchopneumonia (BP). HYPOTHESIS/

objectivesEvaluate the diagnostic accuracy of an AUSC scoring system based on a standard lung sound nomenclature at different cut-off values, accounting for the absence of a gold standard test for BP diagnosis. ANIMALS: Three hundred thirty-one calves.

methodsWe considered the following pathological lung sounds: increased breath sounds (score 1), wheezes and crackles (score 2), increased bronchial sounds (score 3), and pleural friction rubs (score 4). Thoracic auscultation was categorized as AUSC1 (positive calves for scores ≥1), AUSC2 (positive calves for scores ≥2), and AUSC3 (positive calves for scores ≥3). The accuracy of AUSC categorizations was determined using 3 imperfect diagnostic tests with a Bayesian latent class model and sensitivity analysis (informative vs weakly informative vs noninformative priors and with vs without covariance between ultrasound and clinical scoring).

resultsBased on the priors used, the sensitivity (95% Bayesian confidence interval [BCI]) of AUSC1 ranged from 0.89 (0.80-0.97) to 0.95 (0.86-0.99), with a specificity (95% BCI) of 0.54 (0.45-0.71) to 0.60 (0.47-0.94). Removing increased breath sounds from the categorizations resulted in increased specificity (ranging between 0.97 [0.93-0.99] and 0.98 [0.94-0.99] for AUSC3) at the cost of decreased sensitivity (0.66 [0.54-0.78] to 0.81 [0.65-0.97]). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: A standardized definition of lung sounds improved AUSC accuracy for BP diagnosis in calves.

Indexed as

BronchopneumoniaCattle DiseasesAnimalsAuscultationBayes TheoremCattleLungRespiratory Soundscalvesrespiratory diseasethoracic auscultationthoracic ultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID37390128
PMCPMC10365044
OpenAlexW4382752338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.