Meta-Analysis of the Use of Eimeria Lesion Scores and Oocyst Counts in Floor-Pen Studies.

Abstract

The success of treatments for, or prophylaxis of, coccidiosis with classical anticoccidial feed additives or alternative treatments can be measured with a variety of metrics. Three important metrics are body weight or body weight gain (BW or BWG), lesion scores (LS), and oocyst shedding (OS). A meta-analysis of floor-pen experiments was performed to determine if using LS and OS would lead to systematically different assessments compared to the use of BW at the end of the experiment, and to what degree changes in LS and OS are correlated with BW. We also investigated if there were days postinfection on which one could expect larger ratios between untreated control groups and treated groups for LS and OS as an aid to selecting sampling days. A total of 38 experiments from 37 articles in peer-reviewed journals were included. Data sets containing experiments that investigated LS or OS in addition to BW or BWG to assess anticoccidial feed additives or alternative treatment were tested for the effectiveness of the intervention either by univariate meta-analyses for each metric or by robust variance estimation multivariate meta-analysis combining BW with LS or BW with OS. The results did not show evidence that the inclusion of LS and OS in experimental designs to assess the effect of conventional and alternative feed additives with assumed anticoccidial activity systematically changed the conclusions drawn from an experiment, but there was no significant correlation between the LS and OS ratios of untreated and treated groups determined during the experiments with the ratios of the BW at the end of the experiment for each experiment. There was also no discernible relationship between LS or OS ratios and days postinfection.