Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38688092›Full record

ArticlePreventive veterinary medicine2024

Analysis of within-pen and between-pen fenceline temporal contact networks in confined feedlot cattle.

H L Seger, M W Sanderson, B J White, C Lanzas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive veterinary medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

H L SegerCenter for Outcomes Research and Epidemiology, Department of Diagnostic Medicine and Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, United States.
M W SandersonCenter for Outcomes Research and Epidemiology, Department of Diagnostic Medicine and Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, United States. Electronic address: sandersn@vet.k-state.edu.
B J WhiteDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, United States.
C LanzasDepartment of Population Health and Pathobiology, North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Raleigh, NC 27606, United States.

Funding

Exposure heterogeneity & environmental transmission dynamics of Escherichia coliR01GM117618 · NIGMS · NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY RALEIGH · PI LANZAS, CRISTINA · 2015 to 2018
$1.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM117618
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Though contact networks are important for describing the dynamics for disease transmission and intervention applications, individual animal contact and barriers between animal populations, such as fences, are not often utilized in the construction of these models. The objective of this study was to use contact network analysis to quantify contacts within two confined pens of feedlot cattle and the shared "fenceline" area between the pens at varying temporal resolutions and contact duration to better inform the construction of network-based disease transmission models for cattle within confined-housing systems. Two neighboring pens of feedlot steers were tagged with Real-Time Location System (RTLS) tags. Within-pen contacts were defined with a spatial threshold (SpTh) of 0.71 m and a minimum contact duration (MCD) of either 10 seconds (10 s), 30 seconds (30 s), or 60 seconds (60 s). For the fenceline network location readings were included within an area extending from 1 m on either side of the shared fence. "Fenceline" contacts could only occur between a steer from each pen. Static, undirected, weighted contact networks for within-pen networks and the between-pen network were generated for the full study duration and for daily (24-h), 6-h period, and hourly networks to better assess network heterogeneity. For the full study duration network, the two within-pen networks were densely homogenous. The within-pen networks showed more heterogeneity when smaller timescales (6-h period and hourly) were applied. When contacts were defined with a MCD of 30 s or 60 s, the total number of contacts seen in each network decreased, indicating that most of the contacts observed in our networks may have been transient passing contacts. Cosine similarity was moderate and stable across days for within pen networks. Of the 90 total tagged steers between the two pens, 86 steers (46 steers from Pen 2 and 40 steers from Pen 3) produced at least one contact across the shared fenceline. The total network density for the network created across the shared fenceline between the two pens was 17%, with few contacts at shorter timescales and for MCD of 30 s or 60 s. Overall, the contact networks created here from high-resolution spatial and temporal contact observation data provide estimates for a contact network within commercial US feedlot pens and the contact network created between two neighboring pens of cattle. These networks can be used to better inform pathogen transmission models on social contact networks.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryHousing, AnimalAnimalsCattleCattle DiseasesMaleTime FactorsCattleContact networkFeedlotFenceline

Identifiers

PMID38688092
PMCPMC11247509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.