Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41012743›Full record

ReviewVeterinary sciences2025

Vetriselvi Sampath, Yu Jin Baek, In Ho Kim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Vetriselvi SampathDepartment of Animal Biotechnology, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, Republic of Korea.
Yu Jin BaekDepartment of Animal Biotechnology, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, Republic of Korea.
In Ho KimDepartment of Animal Biotechnology, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6652-2504

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of antibiotics as growth promoters (AGPs) has been a common practice in animal production; however, concerns over microbial resistance have led organizations, such as the FAO, EU, and EFSA, to restrict or ban their use. This has prompted a growing interest in natural alternatives, particularly medicinal herbs, for enhancing animal performance and health. Among these,

Indexed as

herbal additivesoxidative stresspigspoultry

Identifiers

PMID41012743
PMCPMC12474394

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.