ArticleOpen veterinary journal2025
Reactor identification and evaluation of
Article in Open veterinary journal, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: One disease that interferes with reproductive performance is brucellosis, which causes significant economic losses. Aim: This study aimed to identify the reactor and evaluate the results of a Methods: This research method involves the first stage, which involves sampling serum from 100 cattle. Serum specimens are derived from blood taken from the jugular or coccygeal vein using a Vacutainer tube filled with silicone and left at room temperature until the blood is separated into serum and clot. Then, for serological tests in the form of the Rose Bengal test (RBT), if the RBT test is positive, followed by the complement fixation test (CFT) test, and the CFT test is also positive, the patient is designated as a brucellosis reactor. At the same time, if the CFT is positive in vaccinated cattle, the vaccination is considered successful, and if it is negative, it is necessary to reevaluate the immunization. Result: The results of 100 samples showed that the RBT and CFT tests yielded two distinct outcomes: a positive RBT and a negative CFT test, indicating that no Conclusion: Cattle in Malacca Regency were not found to be positive for the
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.