ArticlePorcine health management2025
A proposal of a fecal scoring system based on physicochemical analyses of suckling pig feces.
Article in Porcine health management, 2025. 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.
- Comparative evaluation of post-mortem methods for detection of diarrhoea in early-life piglets.Porcine health management · 2026Article
- Early-life intervention withFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Dietary biochar enhances growth performance and feed efficiency in growing pigs evidence from integrated transcriptomic and proteomic analyses.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDigestive disorders are one of the main health problems in suckling piglets. The correct visual identification of feces in suckling piglets is an important tool for the diagnosis of enteric diseases. The aim of the present observational study was to analyze different physicochemical parameters of the feces of suckling piglets aged 0 to 21 days: visual appearance (color and consistency), fecal dry matter (FDM) content and pH. A total of 482 fecal samples were collected and visually classified into six categories: meconium, colostrum stage feces and 4 further scores according to the degree of consistency: 0 = form; 1 = pasty; 2 = liquid; and 3 = watery feces. The percentage of FDM was estimated by two drying methods, oven and microwave, doing duplicates in each one to evaluate methods, and both were compared.
resultsThe most frequent colors of each feces category were dark green or dark brown for meconium; orange for colostrum; formed feces were mostly ocher and for the rest of the feces, the colors varied predominantly cream and ocher. Regarding FDM, liquid and watery categories had no statistically significant differences between them; meconium and colostrum feces FDM were not statistically different from pasty feces. The correlation coefficient between the FDM values of the duplicate analyses of the samples by both methods (oven and microwave) was very high (> 0.988). Importantly, no differences were found while comparing the results between both methods (p = 0.078), and the correlation coefficient between all samples analyzed with both methods was very high (> 0.98). Meconium was the only one that differed significantly from the rest in terms of pH.
conclusionThe physicochemical study of the feces of suckling piglets including color, FDM and pH allowed the establishment of an objective fecal score to characterize the stools in this age group.
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.