ArticleIrish veterinary journal2026
Longitudinal study of diagnostic sample matrices for respiratory pathogens on Irish farrow-to-finish pig herds.
Article in Irish veterinary journal, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPorcine respiratory disease complex (PRDC) involves multifactorial pathogen interactions that complicate surveillance strategies in commercial pig production. Current individual animal sampling methods present logistical constraints and animal welfare concerns. This longitudinal study evaluated the antibody responses and diagnostic efficacy of matched antemortem sample specimens (serum, nasal and pen-based oral fluids) for detecting Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (App), Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae (Mhyo), porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) and influenza A virus (IAV) across all production stages from weaning to slaughter (5 to 24 weeks of age) in seven Irish farrow-to-finish herds.
resultsHigh-herd seroprevalence was observed at all five time-points, with concurrent antibody detection for the targeted respiratory pathogens occurring in 27.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 24.4–30.2%] of individual samples and 64.7% (95% CI = 46.5–80.3%) at herd level. Nucleic acid co-detection from two pathogens occurred in 11.1% of oral fluid and 15.3% of nasal swab samples, indicating widespread co-infection patterns. McNemar’s test demonstrated significant discordance between pathogen-specific immunoassays and PCR methodologies across all matrices (p < 0.05). Cohen’s kappa (κ) analysis revealed pathogen-specific agreement patterns. Slight matrix concordance was observed between nasal swabs and oral fluids for App (κ = 0.177) and Mhyo (κ = 0.135), while substantial agreement was demonstrated for PRRSV-1 (κ = 0.752) and IAV (κ = 0.629). Detection of PRRSV-1 showed moderate agreement between serum and nasal swabs (κ = 0.570) or oral fluids (κ = 0.575). Pathogen-specific detection peaks varied by agent and sample matrix with peaks for App and IAV at 5 weeks of age, Mhyo during finishing stages and extended PRRSV-1 detection window (10–19 weeks of age) in oral fluids. Prevalence detection rates were consistently equivalent or superior in oral fluids compared to nasal swabs, with significantly higher PRRSV-1 detection in oral fluids versus serum.
conclusionsQuantitative analysis validates oral fluid sampling as a diagnostically robust alternative to conventional matrices. The documented pathogen-specific temporal patterns and matrix-specific performance data provide evidence-based parameters for refining surveillance protocols. Statistical validation of oral fluid efficacy, combined with operational and welfare advantages, supports adoption of oral fluid sampling for comprehensive PRDC monitoring to enhance early pathogen detection, improve diagnostic accuracy, boost production efficiency and assist herd health management decisions in intensive pig production systems.
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.