↓ Skip to main content

In-silico characterization of the relationship between the Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus prevalence at the piglet and litter levels in a farrowing room

Overview of attention for article published in Porcine Health Management, April 2023
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
In-silico characterization of the relationship between the Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus prevalence at the piglet and litter levels in a farrowing room
Published in
Porcine Health Management, April 2023
DOI 10.1186/s40813-023-00309-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Onyekachukwu H. Osemeke, Eduardo de Freitas Costa, Vinicius Weide, Swaminathan Jayaraman, Gustavo S. Silva, Daniel C. L. Linhares

Abstract

Family oral fluids (FOF) sampling has been described as a sampling technique where a rope is exposed to sows and respective suckling litters and thereafter wrung to obtain fluids. PCR-based testing of FOF reveals presence of PRRS virus RNA only at the litter level, as opposed to conventional individual-animal-based sampling methods that demonstrate PRRSV RNA at the piglet level. The relationship between the PRRSV prevalence at the individual piglet level and at the litter level in a farrowing room has not been previously characterized. Using Monte Carlo simulations and data from a previous study, the relationship between the proportion of PRRSV-positive (viremic) pigs in the farrowing room, the proportion of litters in the farrowing room with at least one viremic pig, and the likely proportion of litters to be positive by a FOF RT-rtPCR test in a farrowing room was characterized, taking into account the spatial distribution (homogeneity) of viremic pigs within farrowing rooms. There was a linear relationship between piglet-level- and litter-level prevalence, where the latter was always larger than the former. When the piglet-level prevalence was 1%, 5%, 10%, 20%, and 50%, the true-litter level prevalence was 5.36%, 8.93%, 14.29%, 23.21%, and 53.57%, respectively. The corresponding apparent-litter prevalence by FOF was 2.06%, 6.48%, 11.25%, 21.60%, and 51.56%, respectively. This study provides matching prevalence estimates to help guide sample size calculations. It also provides a framework to estimate the likely proportion of viremic pigs, given the PRRSV RT-rtPCR positivity rate of FOF samples submitted from a farrowing room.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 1 25%
Other 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 25%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2023.
All research outputs
#17,537,065
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Porcine Health Management
#161
of 258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,129
of 421,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Porcine Health Management
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 258 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,655 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.