ArticlePathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Oral Fluid Sampling in Group-Housed Sows: Field Observations.
Article in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 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
Oral fluid sampling is a well-established, non-invasive method for disease surveillance in growing pigs; however, its application in group-housed gestating sows is under-researched. This study (1) characterized sow behaviors associated with oral fluid sampling and (2) documented the transfer of an environmental target into pen-based oral fluid samples. Field observations were conducted on a commercial sow farm in 12 pens of gestating sows sorted by parity (gilts, parity one, and multiparous sows). Sow oral fluid sampling behaviors were quantified by recording interactions with rope samplers using video cameras and then analyzing the recorded footage. All oral fluid sampling attempts were successful. Unlike growing pigs, experience with rope samplers ("training") did not increase sow participation, but participation in oral fluid collection did increase as sampling time increased. The transfer of environmental components into oral fluid samples was demonstrated by introducing a fluorescent tracer into the pen and then detecting specific fluorescence in the samples (8 of 12 pens). These findings support the implementation of oral fluid sampling in group-housed sows and provide practical recommendations for optimizing surveillance protocols, including extended sampling times and use of at least two ropes per pen.
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.