ArticleTransboundary and emerging diseases2025
Dynamics of Porcine Circovirus Type 3 Detection in Pre-Weaning Piglets: Insight From Multiple Sampling Methods.
Article in Transboundary and emerging diseases, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Porcine circovirus type 3 (PCV3) has been identified worldwide and is associated with reproductive and systemic diseases, yet the dynamics of PCV3 within pig farms remain unclear. Building upon our previous study, which initialised comparisons of different sample types for the detection of PCV3 in a sow farm, this study expanded both the range of sample types and the timeline of sampling in piglets and sows to better understand the PCV3 dynamics. This study collected two additional sample types-oropharyngeal swab (OS) and oral fluid (OF) along with placental umbilical cord (PUC) blood and processing fluid (PF) that were used in the previous study. Data were collected from July to August and October 2022; the aforementioned four sample types from 51 litters were collected, and additional OS samples were collected from two to three identified piglets per litter on days 1, 7, 14, and 21 post-farrowing. Besides, blood swabs were taken from 135 sows subject to both PCR test and oestrogen measurement. PF showed the highest detection rates (50/51), while OS and OF revealed 33/51 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51.2%-76.8%) and 37/51 (95% CI: 59.5%-83.5%) detection rates; both were higher than that of PUC blood (22/51, 95% CI: 30.2%-56.8%). Despite the similarity between OS and OF samples, they did not identify the same population as infected, as the agreement between the samples was only fair at 90% level. The Bayesian generalised linear mixed model suggested PCV3 was more likely to be detected in both OS and OF compared to PUC blood, and PCV3 was present in the farrowing room throughout the pre-weaning period using an OS. Finally, we observed higher PCV3 detection rates in sows after farrowing; however, no evidence was found that such a pattern was associated with the decreased concentration of oestrogen.
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.