ArticleVeterinary world2025
Potency of
Article in Veterinary world, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of ProbioticAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Evaluation of homemade biodesinfectant solution based onOpen veterinary journal · 2026Article
- Comparative assessment of medicinal plant, probiotic, and antibiotic supplementation on the growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality of broiler chicken.Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2026Article
- Eco-friendly microencapsulation ofVeterinary world · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: The emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria due to the widespread use of antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) necessitates the exploration of sustainable alternatives in poultry production. This study evaluated the efficacy of Materials and Methods: A total of 80 broiler chickens were randomly allocated into four groups: T0 (uninfected control), T1 (APEC-infected control), T2 (APEC + AGP, 0.1% zinc bacitracin), and T3 (APEC + probiotic, 0.5% Results: Probiotic supplementation significantly improved FCR, BWG, and FE (p < 0.05), with the T3 group achieving the most favorable outcomes. SOD activity was markedly higher, and MDA levels were reduced in probiotic-treated birds compared with the AGP and infected groups. Moreover, Conclusion:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.