ArticleEquine veterinary journal2026
Molecular detection of pathogens in an equine fever diagnostic panel: 2019-2023.
Article in Equine veterinary journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Molecular detection of pathogens in an equine fever diagnostic panel: 2019-2023.Equine veterinary journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA common diagnostic approach for febrile horses is to test for a panel of potential pathogens. Panels are curated by expert opinion and vary between diagnostic laboratories.
objectivesTo report the results of a newly developed equine fever diagnostic panel (EFDP) between 2019 and 2023 and evaluate the frequency of positive results. STUDY
designRetrospective descriptive study.
methodsThe EFDP requires submission of whole blood, nasal swab, and faecal samples, and includes PCR tests for 12 pathogens that can present as fever without localising signs of illness or infection. Submission metadata and results of all submissions with EFDP performed between July 2019 and April 2023 were tabulated. Submissions were excluded if horses were <1 year old or any tests were cancelled.
resultsOne or more pathogens were identified on the EFDP in 366/961 (38%) cases. The most common pathogens identified were Anaplasma phagocytophilum and beta coronavirus. Co-infections with 2 or 3 pathogens were identified in 48/366 (13%) positive panels. Ancillary testing detected Salmonella in 5/23 (22%) submissions. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Clinical information regarding the cases was lacking. The majority of submissions originated from the northeastern United States, and results might not be generalisable to other geographic regions.
conclusionsThe panel was able to detect a possible causative agent in approximately a third of cases. Based on the results of ancillary testing and recent literature, Potomac Horse Fever PCR on faeces (in addition to whole blood) and Salmonella culture have been added to the EFDP as of November 2024.
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.