ArticleTranslational animal science2025
Comparison of a novel bovine respiratory disease prediction technology and an automated animal disease detection technology to traditional methods in a U.S. feedlot.
Article in Translational animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping Variability in Bovine Respiratory Disease Risk Factors in Beef Production Systems: A Scoping Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Closed-loop artificial intelligence agents for animal epidemic prediction and decision support in livestock farming: a review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
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 objectives of this study were to evaluate feedlot cattle health and performance among three different bovine respiratory disease (BRD) control programs and two different disease detection modalities (i.e., a 3 × 2 factorial design). The BRD control treatments consisted of 1) Negative control, 2) Positive control (Tildipirosin to 100% of the group), and 3) Targeted BRD control program (TBCP) based on individualized risk prediction generated by a novel technology ([Whisper On Arrival; Merck Animal Health] ± Tildipirosin based on a proprietary algorithm). The disease detection treatments consisted of 1) cattle monitored exclusively by a novel animal disease detection (ADD) technology (SenseHub Feedlot; Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA and its affiliates), or 2) cattle monitored by traditional pen-riding (PR) methods. Auction market-derived beef calves were procured by traditional means, transported to a single site, and randomly allocated to one of six treatment groups within each block. The study population was followed to closeout (224 d). Data were analyzed as a completely randomized block design within a 3 × 2 factorial treatment format. No interactions (
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.