ArticleOpen veterinary journal2025
Article in Open veterinary journal, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The emergence of Aim: This study aimed to characterize the phenotypic and genotypic antimicrobial resistance profiles of Methods: Between January 2023 and December 2023, 786 pigs with mild respiratory disease were randomly sampled from 19 conveniently selected farms in Jilin Province, China. The presence of one or more mild clinical signs, such as nasal discharge, coughing, labored breathing, lethargy, or anorexia, defines this condition. From these pigs, 13 Results: Antimicrobial susceptibility was interpreted according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. All 13 isolates demonstrated complete resistance (13/13, 100.00%) to β-lactams (meropenem, aztreonam, cefazolin, and ampicillin) and sulfonamides (sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim). In contrast, all isolates were susceptible to fosfomycin and rifampicin (13/13, 100%). Variable susceptibility to florfenicol was observed (9/13, 69.23%). Genomic analysis revealed the spread of resistance genes ( Conclusion: This study provides the first comprehensive antimicrobial resistance profile of porcine-associated
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.