Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41011840›Full record

ArticlePathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Swine Practitioner Practices on Oral Fluid Sampling in U.S. Swine Farms: A Nationwide Survey.

Xiaomei Yue, Mickey Leonard, Margret Tavai-Tuisalo'o, Sasidhar Malladi, Mariana Kikuti, Claudio Marcello Melini, Pam Zaabel, Marie R Culhane, Cesar A Corzo

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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. Microbiology spectrum · 2026
    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

9 authors.

Xiaomei YueDepartment of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4198-2541
Mickey LeonardDepartment of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA.
Margret Tavai-Tuisalo'oDepartment of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA.
Sasidhar MalladiDepartment of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA.
Mariana KikutiDepartment of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8119-7236
Claudio Marcello MeliniDepartment of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA.ORCID 0009-0001-4640-9456
Pam ZaabelNational Pork Board, Des Moines, IA 50325, USA.
Marie R CulhaneDepartment of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3547-7576
Cesar A CorzoDepartment of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2749-3496

Funding

National Pork Board 23-043
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oral fluid sampling has been widely adopted in swine health surveillance, offering an effective and cost-effective method for monitoring endemic and emerging diseases. This study characterized oral fluid sampling practices within U.S. pig production systems. An online questionnaire was conducted between June and October 2023, targeting swine practitioners, to collect data on implementation, usage, sampling protocols, and handling procedures. A total of 67 valid responses were received, representing an estimated 58M growing pigs and 3.9M sows. Nearly all respondents (99%) reported being familiar with or using oral fluid sampling for diagnostic purposes. The median of ropes hung per barn was two (interquartile range [IQR]: 1; 4), with 68% using one rope per two pens. The median of pens sampled per barn was six (IQR: 4; 10). Pigs typically accessed the rope for a median of 20 min (IQR: 17.5; 30). Sampling frequency varied by farm types. Half of gilt-development-unit (GDU) respondents collected samples monthly. When submitting samples to the veterinary diagnostic laboratories, pig age (91%) was the most frequently included information. This study reveals the widespread and varied adoption of oral fluid sampling, highlighting the need for standardized collection procedures to support consistent interpretation and improve reliability for detecting emerging pathogens.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandrySalivaSpecimen HandlingSwine DiseasesAnimalsFarmsSurveys and QuestionnairesSwineUnited Statesdisease surveillanceoral fluidsampling procedureswine diseaseswine farms

Identifiers

PMID41011840
PMCPMC12473141

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.