ArticleVeterinary medicine and science2026
Survey on Faecal Microbiota Transplantation and Probiotic Use in Equine Practice in France and Belgium.
Article in Veterinary medicine and science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Comprehensive Review of the Equine Gut Microbiome in Health and Disease.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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFaecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) and probiotics are used in equine practice. Understanding veterinarians' perceptions and practices is crucial for effective implementation.
objective(1) Evaluate the prevalence, usage patterns and perceived effectiveness of probiotics and FMT among equine veterinarians in France and Belgium. (2) Assess their knowledge, practices and influencing factors across demographics and settings. (3) Explore links between FMT protocols and treatment satisfaction. STUDY
designCross-sectional survey.
methodsAn online survey collected demographic data and responses on the use of probiotics and FMT. Analyses included descriptive statistics, chi-square tests and logistic regression models.
resultsNinety-six equine veterinarians participated, practicing in Belgium (52.1%), France (39.6%) or both (8.3%). Probiotic use was reported by 82.1%, more frequent in field than clinical practice (odds ratio [OR] = 3.61, 95% CI [1.09, 12.02], p = 0.036) and in France than Belgium (OR = 5.08, 95% CI [1.44, 17.94], p = 0.012). Probiotics were used for chronic diarrhoea (88.0%), acute diarrhoea (67.6%) and inflammatory bowel diseases (45.9%). Most veterinarians (83.3%) defined probiotics well, but 16.7% misidentified non-probiotic products. FMT was used by 76.0%, mainly occasionally and therapeutically, more in clinical than field practice (OR = 4.79, 95% CI [1.03, 22.27], p = 0.046). In theory, 58.3% prioritized infection-free donors, but only 22.5% tested donors before FMT, mostly using coprology (93.8%). Those who tested donors reported higher perceived efficacy (p = 0.0029). MAIN LIMITATIONS: Potential selection bias, as participation was voluntary. Generalizability might be limited by focus on France and Belgium. Sample size, while informative, should be expanded.
conclusionProbiotics and FMT were commonly used therapeutically by equine veterinarians in France and Belgium. Although probiotic use was widespread, some misunderstandings remained. FMT protocols varied, with donor faeces often untested. Treatment satisfaction was generally positive but estimated success rates varied. Standardized FMT protocols are needed to improve outcomes and consistency.
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.