ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus Vaccine Efficacy and Its Modifiers.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 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.
- Probiotics as Potential Enhancers of Veterinary Vaccines.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Overcoming Antigenic Drift in PEDV: Broadly Protective Antigen Design and sIgA-Driven Lactogenic Immunity.Veterinary sciences · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) continues to inflict devastating losses on global swine production. By systematically reviewing and meta-analysing 32 high-quality studies, we quantified the protective efficacy of PED vaccines and dissected how core variables shape that protection. Using fecal scores as the endpoint, we pooled effect sizes under a random-effects model and explored sources of heterogeneity through subgroup analyses. This analysis showed a pooled effect size (Hedges' g) of -5.80, confirming that vaccination markedly alleviates diarrheal severity. Moreover, substantial heterogeneity was detected across studies. Stratified analyses revealed that vaccine type, vaccination target, vaccination route, and vaccination frequency are the principal sources of variation, all of which significantly influence vaccine efficacy. Conventional inactivated or live-attenuated formulations still dominate the field, but recombinant live-viral platforms are emerging. Piglets and sows represent the most responsive immunological targets. A two-dose regimen consistently outperforms a single injection, and delivery via intranasal, oral or intramuscular routes offers distinct advantages that can be exploited to maximise mucosal and systemic immunity. Overall, the optimal impact on PED prevention and control is achieved when the vaccine is correctly chosen and paired with an appropriate immunization protocol and delivery route.
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.