Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42375942›Full record

ArticleOpen veterinary journal2026

Effectiveness of neem (

Nouri Brah, Issa Hamadou, Mamman Mani, Jens B Aune

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Nouri BrahAnimal Production Department, National Institute for Agriculture Research of Niger, Niamey, Niger.
Issa HamadouAnimal Production Department, National Institute for Agriculture Research of Niger, Niamey, Niger.
Mamman ManiAnimal Production Department, National Institute for Agriculture Research of Niger, Niamey, Niger.
Jens B AuneFaculty of Landscape and Society, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Newcastle disease (ND) is the primary constraint on local chicken production in family poultry farming systems in Niger. During epidemic periods, producers commonly resort to locally available resources to manage the disease. Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the infusion of neem bark ( Methods: Eighty local chickens were allocated across two experimental sites. The chickens were further divided into four treatment groups within each site. Each group received ad libitum access to drinking water containing neem bark treatment for 2 weeks. The treatments consisted of T0, T13, T26, and T39, corresponding to 0, 13, 26, and 39 g of neem bark per liter of water, respectively. The data collected included feed intake, live weight of chickens, disease prevalence, and mortality rates. Statistical analyses were performed using R software. Orthogonal polynomial contrasts were applied to evaluate the linear and quadratic responses to the different doses of neem bark for treating ND. Survival analysis was performed to determine mortality. Results: Indicated a general decline in feed intake and live weight across all groups. The disease prevalence increased, but without significant linear or quadratic effects ( Conclusion: This study underscores the importance of using traditional vaccines as the main approach to prevent disease outbreaks. No therapeutic benefit was observed from using neem bark in chicken drinking water for ND treatment.

Indexed as

AzadirachtaChickensNewcastle DiseasePlant BarkPlant ExtractsPoultry DiseasesAnimalsPlant ExtractsLocal chickensNeem barkNewcastle diseaseNigerTreatment

Identifiers

PMID42375942
PMCPMC13314033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.