ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Antibiotic Treatment vs. Non-Antibiotic Treatment in Bovine Clinical Mastitis During Lactation with Mild and Moderate Severity.
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Probiotics as Sustainable Alternatives to Mitigate Antibiotic Resistance in Bovine Mastitis Management.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Bovine Mastitis Therapy at a Crossroads: Pharmacokinetic Barriers, Biofilms, Antimicrobial Resistance, and Emerging Solutions.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Short Communication: Evaluation of MALDI-TOF and Sequencing Technique as Typing Tools forMicroorganisms · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis review aimed to compare the efficacy of antibiotic treatment vs. non-antibiotic treatment in mild and moderate clinical mastitis in lactating dairy cows, categorized by the causative pathogen.
methodsThe initial systematic review plan, which resulted in only four relevant articles, was altered due to limited available studies and significant heterogeneity among them. Consequently, five additional articles, closely meeting our criteria with minor differences, were included to ensure comprehensive analysis, resulting in nine included articles. Due to these pragmatic constraints, this review represents a hybrid between a systematic and a narrative review. The outcome of interest was the bacteriological cure (BC).
resultsThe findings revealed that antibiotic treatment resulted in improved BC rates for cases caused by Streptococci. For cases caused by
conclusionsThis study underscores the importance of regular pathogen diagnostics to guide appropriate treatment, advocating for the use of on-farm rapid tests to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use while ensuring effective treatment outcomes.
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.