Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41671269›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Comparison of thoracic ultrasonography (TUS), clinical respiratory scoring (CRS), and blood analysis to evaluate respiratory dysfunction in transported calves.

Luca L van Dijk, Susanne Siegmann, Niamh L Field, Katie Sugrue, Cornelis G van Reenen, Eddie A M Bokkers, Gearoid Sayers, Muireann Conneely

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Luca L van DijkTeagasc, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8527-5465
Susanne SiegmannTeagasc, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Ireland.
Niamh L FieldTeagasc, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Ireland.
Katie SugrueTeagasc, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Ireland.
Cornelis G van ReenenAnimal Production Systems group, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Eddie A M BokkersAnimal Production Systems group, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2000-7600
Gearoid SayersDepartment of Biological and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Munster Technological University Kerry, Tralee, Ireland.
Muireann ConneelyTeagasc, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mixing of calves during and after transport exposes them to large numbers of pathogens, increasing their risk of developing bovine respiratory disease after arrival. Identifying individual calves with respiratory disease is important to assess transport fitness and to facilitate timely treatment. This study compared three screening tests (thoracic ultrasound scores [TUS], clinical respiratory scores [CRS], and blood variables indicative of immune and inflammation status) for detecting respiratory disease in calves before and after transport to assess the degree of agreement in identifying respiratory dysfunction in transported calves. Thoracic ultrasound scores (0: healthy to 5: severe pneumonia; TUS of 4 and 5 were rare and reclassified as TUS 3 for analysis), CRS (0: healthy, 1: mild, 2: moderate, 3: severe), and blood variables (haemoglobin; red and white blood cell, neutrophil, lymphocyte, monocyte, basophil, and eosinophil counts; and neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio; serum-amyloid-A; total immunoglobulins; and immunoglobulins -A, -G, and -M) were compared in 65 calves at five time points; pre-transport (T1), on arrival (T2), 3 or 7 days post-arrival (T3; TUS and CRS only), and approximately ten (T4) and eighteen days (T5) post-arrival. Comparatively, TUS and CRS had different distributions between time points with TUS gradually increasing between T1 and T3 and declining thereafter, while CRS rapidly increased between T1 and T2, followed by a gradual decrease. Lymphocyte count was lower for a TUS of 3 than for a TUS of 1 or 2, serum-amyloid-A was higher for a TUS of 2 or 3 than for a TUS of 0, total immunoglobulins and immunoglobulin-G were lower for TUS of 3 than for a TUS of 2, and immunoglobulin-M was higher for a TUS of 1 or 2 than for a TUS of 0. Haemoglobin, WBC, and lymphocyte count were lower for CRS of 1 or 2 than for a CRS of 0. In conclusion, there was no agreement between TUS and CRS on the severities of individual scores. Though lymphocyte count was lower for moderate or severe CRS or TUS, no other blood variables showed a consistent pattern of change in relation to TUS or CRS.

Indexed as

Cattle DiseasesAnimalsCattleUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID41671269
PMCPMC12893609

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.