ArticleTropical animal health and production2024
Surveillance of Schmallenberg virus in cattle populations in Northeastern Brazil.
Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to conduct a serological investigation of Schmallenberg virus (SBV) infection in cattle raised in the State of Alagoas. A total of 460 serum samples from the Agricultural Defense Agency of Alagoas (ADEAL) serum bank were analyzed. These samples were collected from unvaccinated cattle on 100 properties across 99 municipalities in Alagoas, representing the three mesoregions: Agreste, Leste, and Sertão. Serological diagnosis was performed using commercial indirect Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) kit. The results showed that 0.87% (4 out of 460) of the samples yielded questionable results in the indirect ELISA (with calculated percentages > 50.00% and ≤ 60.00%). Upon further testing with competitive ELISA, only one sample tested positive. These findings underscore the need to strengthen regional surveillance and control strategies for emerging pathogens. Additionally, further studies, including viral isolation from both ruminants and vectors, are crucial to confirm the circulation of this pathogen. Such comprehensive investigations are essential for improving our understanding of SBV dynamics and for developing effective control measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39695031What 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.