A scoping review of the detection, epidemiology and control of Cyclospora cayetanensis with an emphasis on produce, water and soil.

Cyclospora cayetanensis is a parasite causing cyclosporiasis (an illness in humans). Produce (fruits, vegetables, herbs), water and soil contaminated with C. cayetanensis have been implicated in human infection. The objective was to conduct a scoping review of primary research in English on the detection, epidemiology and control of C. cayetanensis with an emphasis on produce, water and soil. MEDLINE® (Web of ScienceTM), Agricola (ProQuest), CABI Global Health, and Food Science and Technology Abstracts (EBSCOhost) were searched from 1979 to February 2020. Of the 349 relevant primary research studies identified, there were 75 detection-method studies, 40 molecular characterisation studies, 38 studies of Cyclospora in the environment (33 prevalence studies, 10 studies of factors associated with environmental contamination), 246 human infection studies (212 prevalence/incidence studies, 32 outbreak studies, 60 studies of environmental factors associated with non-outbreak human infection) and eight control studies. There appears to be sufficient literature for a systematic review of prevalence and factors associated with human infection with C. cayetanensis. There is a dearth of publicly available detection-method studies in soil (n = 0) and water (n = 2), prevalence studies on soil (n = 1) and studies of the control of Cyclospora (particularly on produce prior to retail (n = 0)).

The development of a rapid and reliable method (SAPSWash): For the extraction and recovery of spermatozoa from superabsorbent polymer containing products.

This work presents a rapid and reliable method to recover spermatozoa from Super Absorbent Polymers (SAPs) commonly found in sanitary protection products such as nappies and sanitary towels. The use of salt solutions was investigated and a protocol was developed using a calcium chloride (CaCl2) solution to release semen deposited onto a selected SAP containing product. The method was tested on ultra-sanitary towel samples treated with a known amount of semen. A range of treatments were examined; some samples were prepared and immediately frozen for storage and others were allowed to air dry overnight to replicate the condition of similar items recovered for examination in sexual offence cases. The method allowed the collection of low yields of spermatozoa, but these were still sufficient for microscopic identification of intact heads and to obtain ESI17 DNA profiles from all the samples. This report presents the method, the results obtained and discusses prospective adaptations to the method for validation to implement the method into forensic casework.

How to read and interpret the results of a Bayesian network meta-analysis: a short tutorial.

In this manuscript we use realistic data to conduct a network meta-analysis using a Bayesian approach to analysis. The purpose of this manuscript is to explain, in lay terms, how to interpret the output of such an analysis. Many readers are familiar with the forest plot as an approach to presenting the results of a pairwise meta-analysis. However when presented with the results of network meta-analysis, which often does not include the forest plot, the output and results can be difficult to understand. Further, one of the advantages of Bayesian network meta-analyses is in the novel outputs such as treatment rankings and the probability distributions are more commonly presented for network meta-analysis. Our goal here is to provide a tutorial for how to read the outcome of network meta-analysis rather than how to conduct or assess the risk of bias in a network meta-analysis.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of injectable antibiotic options for the control of bovine respiratory disease in the first 45 days post arrival at the feedlot.

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to determine the comparative efficacy of antibiotics used to control bovine respiratory disease (BRD) in beef cattle on feedlots. The information sources for the review were: MEDLINE®, MEDLINE In-Process and MEDLINE® Daily, AGRICOLA, Epub Ahead of Print, Cambridge Agricultural and Biological Index, Science Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, the Proceedings of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners, World Buiatrics Conference, and the United States Food and Drug Administration Freedom of Information New Animal Drug Applications summaries. The eligible population was weaned beef cattle raised in intensive systems. The interventions of interest were injectable antibiotics used at the time the cattle arrived at the feedlot. The outcome of interest was the diagnosis of BRD within 45 days of arrival at the feedlot. The network meta-analysis included data from 46 studies and 167 study arms identified in the review. The results suggest that macrolides are the most effective antibiotics for the reduction of BRD incidence. Injectable oxytetracycline effectively controlled BRD compared with no antibiotics; however, it was less effective than macrolide treatment. Because oxytetracycline is already commonly used to prevent, control, and treat BRD in groups of feedlot cattle, the use of injectable oxytetracycline for BRD control might have advantages from an antibiotic stewardship perspective.

Comparative efficacy of blanket versus selective dry-cow therapy: a systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis.

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to determine the efficacy of selective dry-cow antimicrobial therapy compared to blanket therapy (all quarters/all cows). Controlled trials were eligible if any of the following were assessed: incidence of clinical mastitis during the first 30 DIM, frequency of intramammary infection (IMI) at calving, or frequency of IMI during the first 30 DIM. From 3480 identified records, nine trials were data extracted for IMI at calving. There was an insufficient number of trials to conduct meta-analysis for the other outcomes. Risk of IMI at calving in selectively treated cows was higher than blanket therapy (RR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.13, 1.16), but substantial heterogeneity was present (I2 = 58%). Subgroup analysis showed that, for trials using internal teat sealants, there was no difference in IMI risk at calving between groups, and no heterogeneity was present. For trials not using internal teat sealants, there was an increased risk in cows assigned to a selective dry-cow therapy protocol, compared to blanket treatment, with substantial heterogeneity in this subgroup. However, the small number of trials and heterogeneity in the subgroup without internal teat sealants suggests that the relative risk between treatments may differ from the determined point estimates based on other unmeasured factors.

Comparative efficacy of antimicrobial treatments in dairy cows at dry-off to prevent new intramammary infections during the dry period or clinical mastitis during early lactation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to assess the relative efficacy of antimicrobial therapy given to dairy cows at dry-off. Eligible studies were controlled trials assessing the use of antimicrobials compared to no treatment or an alternative treatment, and assessed one or more of the following outcomes: incidence of intramammary infection (IMI) at calving, incidence of IMI during the first 30 days in milk (DIM), or incidence of clinical mastitis during the first 30 DIM. Databases and conference proceedings were searched for relevant articles. The potential for bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 algorithm. From 3480 initially identified records, 45 trials had data extracted for one or more outcomes. Network meta-analysis was conducted for IMI at calving. The use of cephalosporins, cloxacillin, or penicillin with aminoglycoside significantly reduced the risk of new IMI at calving compared to non-treated controls (cephalosporins, RR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.23-0.65; cloxacillin, RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.79; penicillin with aminoglycoside, RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.26-0.72). Synthesis revealed challenges with a comparability of outcomes, replication of interventions, definitions of outcomes, and quality of reporting. The use of reporting guidelines, replication among interventions, and standardization of outcome definitions would increase the utility of primary research in this area.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of bacterial and viral vaccines, administered at or near arrival at the feedlot, for control of bovine respiratory disease in beef cattle.

Vaccination against putative causal organisms is a frequently used and preferred approach to controlling bovine respiratory disease complex (BRD) because it reduces the need for antibiotic use. Because approximately 90% of feedlots use and 90% of beef cattle receive vaccines in the USA, information about their comparative efficacy would be useful for selecting a vaccine. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies assessing the comparative efficacy of vaccines to control BRD when administered to beef cattle at or near their arrival at the feedlot. We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Daily Epub Ahead of Print, AGRICOLA, Cambridge Agricultural and Biological Index, Science Citation Index, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science and hand-searched the conference proceedings of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners and World Buiatrics Congress. We found 53 studies that reported BRD morbidity within 45 days of feedlot arrival. The largest connected network of studies, which involved 17 vaccine protocols from 14 studies, was included in the meta-analysis. Consistent with previous reviews, we found little compelling evidence that vaccines used at or near arrival at the feedlot reduce the incidence of BRD diagnosis.

Comparative efficacy of antimicrobials for treatment of clinical mastitis in lactating dairy cattle: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to assess the relative efficacy of antimicrobial therapy for clinical mastitis in lactating dairy cattle. Controlled trials in lactating dairy cattle with natural disease exposure were eligible if they compared an antimicrobial treatment to a non-treated control, placebo, or a different antimicrobial, for the treatment of clinical mastitis, and assessed clinical or bacteriologic cure. Potential for bias was assessed using a modified Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. From 14775 initially identified records, 54 trials were assessed as eligible. Networks were established for bacteriologic cure by bacterial species group, and clinical cure. Disparate networks among bacteriologic cures precluded meta-analysis. Network meta-analysis was conducted for trials assessing clinical cure, but lack of precision of point estimates resulted in wide credibility intervals for all treatments, with no definitive conclusions regarding relative efficacy. Consideration of network geometry can inform future research to increase the utility of current and previous work. Replication of intervention arms and consideration of connection to existing networks would improve the future ability to determine relative efficacy. Challenges in the evaluation of bias in primary research stemmed from a lack of reporting. Consideration of reporting guidelines would also improve the utility of future research.

Comparative efficacy of teat sealants given prepartum for prevention of intramammary infections and clinical mastitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted to assess the relative efficacy of internal or external teat sealants given at dry-off in dairy cattle. Controlled trials were eligible if they assessed the use of internal or external teat sealants, with or without concurrent antimicrobial therapy, compared to no treatment or an alternative treatment, and measured one or more of the following outcomes: incidence of intramammary infection (IMI) at calving, IMI during the first 30 days in milk (DIM), or clinical mastitis during the first 30 DIM. Risk of bias was based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool with modified signaling questions. From 2280 initially identified records, 32 trials had data extracted for one or more outcomes. Network meta-analysis was conducted for IMI at calving. Use of an internal teat sealant (bismuth subnitrate) significantly reduced the risk of new IMI at calving compared to non-treated controls (RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.25-0.72). For comparisons between antimicrobial and teat sealant groups, concerns regarding precision were seen. Synthesis of the primary research identified important challenges related to the comparability of outcomes, replication and connection of interventions, and quality of reporting of study conduct.

Changes in the prevalence of Salmonella serovars associated swine production and correlations of avian, bovine and swine-associated serovars with human-associated serovars in the United States (1997-2015).

As Salmonella enterica is an important pathogen of food animals, surveillance programmes for S. enterica serovars have existed for many years in the United States. Surveillance programmes serve many purposes, one of which is to evaluate alterations in the prevalence of serovars that may signal changes in the ecology of the target organism. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate changes in the proportion of S. enterica serovars isolated from swine over a near 20-year observation period (1997-2015) using four longitudinal data sets from different food animal species. The secondary aim was to evaluate correlations between changes in S. enterica serovars frequently recovered from food animals and changes in S. enterica serovars associated with disease in humans. We found decreasing proportions of S. enterica serovar Typhimurium, serovar Derby and serovar Heidelberg and increasing proportions of S. enterica serovar 4,[5],12:i:-, serovar Infantis and serovar Johannesburg in swine over time. We also found positive correlations for the yearly changes in S. enterica serovar 4,[5],12:i:-, serovar Anatum and serovar Johannesburg between swine and human data; in S. enterica Worthington between avian and human data; and in S. enterica serovar 4,[5],12:i:- between bovine and human data. We found negative correlations for the yearly changes in S. enterica serovar 4,[5],12:i:- and serovar Johannesburg between avian and human data.

Risk of exposure to Coxiella burnetii from ruminant livestock exhibited at Iowa agricultural fairs.

Coxiella burnetii is a zoonotic pathogen typically associated with clinical and asymptomatic infection in ruminant livestock. A re-emerging pathogen of significant public health importance, C. burnetii has caused recent epidemics in the United States and Europe, and public livestock exhibitions are increasingly scrutinized as a potential source of C. burnetii exposure. Although C. burnetii prevalence data among North American domestic ruminants are extremely limited, contemporary studies suggest that this pathogen is both geographically widespread and highly prevalent on a herd basis, especially in dairy cattle and goat populations. We utilized a real-time PCR assay to detect C. burnetii faecal shedding by clinically normal, non-periparturient beef cattle, meat goats and sheep exhibited at Iowa agricultural fairs. Individual faecal samples were collected from beef cattle, meat goats and sheep exhibited at twelve Iowa county fairs during the summer of 2009. The sample pool was blocked by species and fair, and ten samples from each block were randomly selected for the diagnostic assay; this test pool is considered sufficient to identify with 95% confidence a shedding animal in a population prevalence of 2.85% (cattle and sheep) and 6.25% (goats). Detection of C. burnetii DNA was determined through use of a real-time PCR assay validated for use in bovine, ovine and caprine faeces; threshold of detection is one DNA copy per PCR (sensitivity 95.8%, specificity 100%). All tested samples were negative for C. burnetii DNA. We conclude that non-dairy, non-periparturient ruminants exhibited at Iowa fairs are unlikely to shed C. burnetii in their faeces and that this population should not be considered to be a significant exposure risk to other livestock or fair attendees.

Microbial community sequencing analysis of the calf eye microbiota and relationship to infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis.

Infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis (IBK) is an important production limiting disease in cattle. Moraxella bovis has historically been considered the primary causal agent; however, vaccines have not been consistently shown as effective in controlling disease incidence. The purpose of this study was to examine the bacterial community of calf eyes prior to disease onset using high-throughput sequencing of 16S ribosomal RNA and determine if it was associated with IBK occurrence. The study was designed as a case-control nested within a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Eye swabs were collected from all spring-born calves without clinical signs of IBK (t0 swabs) on a research farm with a previous history of IBK disease outbreaks. At follow-up or weaning, calves were diagnosed as IBK positive or negative. The lag time between enrollment swabs (t0) and IBK diagnosis ranged from approximately one to three months. Cases were randomly selected from IBK positive calves and controls were selected from IBK negative calves (i.e. calves that did not exhibit clinical signs of IBK throughout the course of the RCT). Analysis of the fold-change differences between cases and controls did not reveal large-scale distinctions in bacterial composition. However, principal component analysis suggested bacterial composition differences between calf management groups, which were based on dam parity. Moraxella was found to be among the top ten most abundant genera in our population; however, the difference in abundance was not significant between the cases and controls. No large-scale differences in the bacterial communities of calves that did or did not develop IBK were observed in our population. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether the "natural" bacterial population of the calf might ultimately impact disease status. Further study is warranted to examine bacterial taxa that were observed to be significantly more abundant in the cases or controls as potential vaccines/therapeutic targets.

What's in a Name? The Incorrect Use of Case Series as a Study Design Label in Studies Involving Dogs and Cats.

BACKGROUND: Study design labels are used to identify relevant literature to address specific clinical and research questions and to aid in evaluating the evidentiary value of research. Evidence from the human healthcare literature indicates that the label "case series" may be used inconsistently and inappropriately. OBJECTIVE: Our primary objective was to determine the proportion of studies in the canine and feline veterinary literature labeled as case series that actually corresponded to descriptive cohort studies, population-based cohort studies, or other study designs. Our secondary objective was to identify the proportion of case series in which potentially inappropriate inferential statements were made. DESIGN: Descriptive evaluation of published literature. PARTICIPANTS: One-hundred published studies (from 19 journals) labeled as case series. METHODS: Studies were identified by a structured literature search, with random selection of 100 studies from the relevant citations. Two reviewers independently characterized each study, with disagreements resolved by consensus. RESULTS: Of the 100 studies, 16 were case series. The remaining studies were descriptive cohort studies (35), population-based cohort studies (36), or other observational or experimental study designs (13). Almost half (48.8%) of the case series or descriptive cohort studies, with no control group and no formal statistical analysis, included inferential statements about the efficacy of treatment or statistical significance of potential risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Authors, peer-reviewers, and editors should carefully consider the design elements of a study to accurately identify and label the study design. Doing so will facilitate an understanding of the evidentiary value of the results.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of tenderness metrics in control groups used in comparative nutrition experiments.

This review reports the pork quality attributes, Warner-Bratzler Shear Force, Slice Shear Force, Star Probe, pH, marbling, color (Minolta L*/L or Hunter L*/L), and sensory tenderness evaluation, in control groups used in comparative nutrition experiments over the past 20 yr. The original aim of this study was to evaluate if changes in pork quality based on the above metrics occurred over time. To address this question, it was anticipated that data may come from 3 sources with decreasing relevance: representative retail pork surveys, representative post-harvest carcass surveys, and control groups from comparative nutrition experiments. To identify the study population, a review of studies reported in Centre for Agricultural Biosciences International Abstracts (Web of Knowledge; 1994-2014) was conducted. Two national level surveys of retail pork and 146 relevant nutritional experiments studies, with 228 control groups, were identified by the search. It was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis of the retail pork surveys based on only 2 time points. For the comparative studies, a random effects meta-analysis was conducted with year as a covariate to assess the impact of time on the outcome. In the absence of modifiers, there was no evidence of meaningful change in the mean Warner-Bratzler Shear Force, pH, color, marbling, or sensory scores over the study period. There was evidence of substantial between-study heterogeneity in the characteristics of control pigs used over the years for Warner-Bratzler Shear Force and measures of color. The absence of publicly-available representative surveys of pork quality meant the changes in pork quality over time were not clear. If changes in pork quality have occurred, the data suggest that pigs used as controls in experiments may have become less representative of commercial pigs over time and the translatability of study findings from nutrition experiments might be reduced over time. Alternately, if commercial pigs have not changed, then control pigs reflect this. The study does not address if control groups in other experimental intervention studies had similar tenderness patterns as reported here for nutritional interventions. A large amount of potentially available data was excluded from the analysis due to incomplete reporting in the original study reports.

Methods and Processes of Developing the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology - Veterinary (STROBE-Vet) Statement.

BACKGROUND: Reporting of observational studies in veterinary research presents challenges that often are not addressed in published reporting guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To develop an extension of the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement that addresses unique reporting requirements for observational studies in veterinary medicine related to health, production, welfare, and food safety. DESIGN: Consensus meeting of experts. SETTING: Mississauga, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen experts from North America, Europe, and Australia. METHODS: Experts completed a pre-meeting survey about whether items in the STROBE statement should be modified or added to address unique issues related to observational studies in animal species with health, production, welfare, or food safety outcomes. During the meeting, each STROBE item was discussed to determine whether or not rewording was recommended and whether additions were warranted. Anonymous voting was used to determine consensus. RESULTS: Six items required no modifications or additions. Modifications or additions were made to the STROBE items 1 (title and abstract), 3 (objectives), 5 (setting), 6 (participants), 7 (variables), 8 (data sources/measurement), 9 (bias), 10 (study size), 12 (statistical methods), 13 (participants), 14 (descriptive data), 15 (outcome data), 16 (main results), 17 (other analyses), 19 (limitations), and 22 (funding). CONCLUSION: The methods and processes used were similar to those used for other extensions of the STROBE statement. The use of this STROBE statement extension should improve reporting of observational studies in veterinary research by recognizing unique features of observational studies involving food-producing and companion animals, products of animal origin, aquaculture, and wildlife.

Explanation and Elaboration Document for the STROBE-Vet Statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Veterinary Extension.

The STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement was first published in 2007 and again in 2014. The purpose of the original STROBE was to provide guidance for authors, reviewers, and editors to improve the comprehensiveness of reporting; however, STROBE has a unique focus on observational studies. Although much of the guidance provided by the original STROBE document is directly applicable, it was deemed useful to map those statements to veterinary concepts, provide veterinary examples, and highlight unique aspects of reporting in veterinary observational studies. Here, we present the examples and explanations for the checklist items included in the STROBE-Vet statement. Thus, this is a companion document to the STROBE-Vet statement methods and process document (JVIM_14575 "Methods and Processes of Developing the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Veterinary (STROBE-Vet) Statement" undergoing proofing), which describes the checklist and how it was developed.

Explanation and Elaboration Document for the STROBE-Vet Statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology - Veterinary Extension.

The STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement was first published in 2007 and again in 2014. The purpose of the original STROBE was to provide guidance for authors, reviewers and editors to improve the comprehensiveness of reporting; however, STROBE has a unique focus on observational studies. Although much of the guidance provided by the original STROBE document is directly applicable, it was deemed useful to map those statements to veterinary concepts, provide veterinary examples and highlight unique aspects of reporting in veterinary observational studies. Here, we present the examples and explanations for the checklist items included in the STROBE-Vet Statement. Thus, this is a companion document to the STROBE-Vet Statement Methods and process document, which describes the checklist and how it was developed.

Methods and Processes of Developing the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology - Veterinary (STROBE-Vet) Statement.

The reporting of observational studies in veterinary research presents many challenges that often are not adequately addressed in published reporting guidelines. A consensus meeting of experts was organized to develop an extension of the STROBE statement to address observational studies in veterinary medicine with respect to animal health, animal production, animal welfare and food safety outcomes. The consensus meeting was held 11-13 May 2014 in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. Seventeen experts from North America, Europe and Australia attended the meeting. The experts were epidemiologists and biostatisticians, many of whom hold or have held editorial positions with relevant journals. Prior to the meeting, 19 experts completed a survey about whether they felt any of the 22 items of the STROBE statement should be modified and whether items should be added to address unique issues related to observational studies in animal species with health, production, welfare or food safety outcomes. At the meeting, the participants were provided with the survey responses and relevant literature concerning the reporting of veterinary observational studies. During the meeting, each STROBE item was discussed to determine whether or not re-wording was recommended, and whether additions were warranted. Anonymous voting was used to determine whether there was consensus for each item change or addition. The consensus was that six items needed no modifications or additions. Modifications or additions were made to the STROBE items numbered as follows: 1 (title and abstract), 3 (objectives), 5 (setting), 6 (participants), 7 (variables), 8 (data sources/measurement), 9 (bias), 10 (study size), 12 (statistical methods), 13 (participants), 14 (descriptive data), 15 (outcome data), 16 (main results), 17 (other analyses), 19 (limitations) and 22 (funding). Published literature was not always available to support modification to, or inclusion of, an item. The methods and processes used in the development of this statement were similar to those used for other extensions of the STROBE statement. The use of this extension to the STROBE statement should improve the reporting of observational studies in veterinary research related to animal health, production, welfare or food safety outcomes by recognizing the unique features of observational studies involving food-producing and companion animals, products of animal origin, aquaculture and wildlife.

Methods and processes of developing the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology - veterinary (STROBE-Vet) statement.

BACKGROUND: The reporting of observational studies in veterinary research presents many challenges that often are not adequately addressed in published reporting guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To develop an extension of the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement that addresses unique reporting requirements for observational studies in veterinary medicine related to health, production, welfare, and food safety. DESIGN: A consensus meeting of experts was organized to develop an extension of the STROBE statement to address observational studies in veterinary medicine with respect to animal health, animal production, animal welfare, and food safety outcomes. SETTING: Consensus meeting May 11-13, 2014 in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen experts from North America, Europe, and Australia attended the meeting. The experts were epidemiologists and biostatisticians, many of whom hold or have held editorial positions with relevant journals. METHODS: Prior to the meeting, 19 experts completed a survey about whether they felt any of the 22 items of the STROBE statement should be modified and if items should be added to address unique issues related to observational studies in animal species with health, production, welfare, or food safety outcomes. At the meeting, the participants were provided with the survey responses and relevant literature concerning the reporting of veterinary observational studies. During the meeting, each STROBE item was discussed to determine whether or not re-wording was recommended, and whether additions were warranted. Anonymous voting was used to determine whether there was consensus for each item change or addition. RESULTS: The consensus was that six items needed no modifications or additions. Modifications or additions were made to the STROBE items numbered: 1 (title and abstract), 3 (objectives), 5 (setting), 6 (participants), 7 (variables), 8 (data sources/measurement), 9 (bias), 10 (study size), 12 (statistical methods), 13 (participants), 14 (descriptive data), 15 (outcome data), 16 (main results), 17 (other analyses), 19 (limitations), and 22 (funding). LIMITATION: Published literature was not always available to support modification to, or inclusion of, an item. CONCLUSION: The methods and processes used in the development of this statement were similar to those used for other extensions of the STROBE statement. The use of this extension to the STROBE statement should improve the reporting of observational studies in veterinary research related to animal health, production, welfare, or food safety outcomes by recognizing the unique features of observational studies involving food-producing and companion animals, products of animal origin, aquaculture, and wildlife.

A mixed treatment meta-analysis of antibiotic treatment options for bovine respiratory disease - An update.

Bovine respiratory disease is the most economically important disease of feedlot cattle in North America. Choice of antibiotic is a critical factor for producers and veterinarians. We previously published a mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis that combined evidence from published trials and published estimates of comparative efficacy for 12 antibiotics registered for use in the USA. Some of the comparative efficacy estimates were based only on indirect evidence. Since the original review was published, new studies that provide direct evidence of comparative efficacy have been published. We updated the original review to include the current evidence. We also compared the results from the indirect estimates from the prior model with the observed results from randomized control trials. We repeated the original search and found that five of the new studies met the criteria for inclusion in the updated review. Four of these studies provided new data on direct comparisons of active drugs. The results from one study (performed in 2002) that compared ceftiofur pinna and enrofloxacin were inconsistent with the network and were excluded from the analysis. Three new direct comparison studies examined gamithromycin compared with tulathromycin, florfenicol, and tilmicosin. The results of our analysis suggested that the indirect estimates from the prior model provided reasonable estimates of the risk ratios revealed by the primary studies. For example, for the comparison of gamithromycin (referent) with tulathromycin, the original model predicted a risk ratio of re-treatment of 0.54 (95% credible interval 0.27-0.87). The subsequent randomized controlled trial revealed that the observed risk ratio of re-treatment was 0.59 (95% confidence interval 0.45-0.78). The results of other comparisons were also similar. For the gamithromycin (referent) to florfenicol comparison, the observed randomized trial RR was 1.17 (95% confidence interval 0.83-1.64) and the indirect estimate of RR from the prior model was 0.84 (95% credibility interval 0.48-1.3). The gamithromycin to tilmicosin (referent) observed RR from the randomized trial was 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.67-1.47) and the indirect estimate of RR from the prior model was 1.09 (95% credible interval 0.64-1.79). The results suggested that indirect estimates provided reasonable estimates of RR when direct data were not available.