Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,378

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Defining postpartum uterine disease in cattle

Open access
Sheldon, I. Martin, Lewis, Gregory S., LeBlanc, Stephen, Gilbert, Robert O.·2006·Theriogenology

Abstract

Uterine function is often compromised in cattle by bacterial contamination of the uterine lumen after parturition, and pathogenic bacteria often persist, causing uterine disease, a key cause of infertility in cattle. However, the definition or characterization of uterine disease frequently lacks precision or varies among research groups. The aim of the present paper was to provide clear clinical definitions of uterine disease that researchers could adopt. Puerperal metritis should be defined as an animal with an abnormally enlarged uterus and a fetid watery red-brown uterine discharge, associated with signs of systemic illness (decreased milk yield, dullness or other signs of toxemia) and fever > 39.5 degrees C, within 21 days after parturition. Animals that are not systemically ill, but have an abnormally enlarged uterus and a purulent uterine discharge detectable in the vagina, within 21 days post partum, may be classified as having clinical metritis. Clinical endometritis is characterised by the presence of purulent (> 50% pus) uterine discharge detectable in the vagina 21 days or more after parturition, or mucuopurulent (approximately 50% pus, 50% mucus) discharge detectable in the vagina after 26 days post partum. In the absence of clinical endometritis, a cow with subclinical endometritis is defined by > 18% neutrophils in uterine cytology samples collected 21-33 days post partum, or > 10% neutrophils at 34-47 days. Pyometra is defined as the accumulation of purulent material within the uterine lumen in the presence of a persistent corpus luteum and a closed cervix. In conclusion, we have suggested definitions for common postpartum uterine diseases, which can be readily adopted by researchers and veterinarians.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.08.021

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Cited by

See all 1,378

Metadata

Authors
Sheldon, I. M., Lewis, G. S., LeBlanc, S., & Gilbert, R. O.
Venue
Theriogenology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-05
Volume
65
Issue
8
Pages
1516-1530
ISSN
0093-691X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2123402700
Cited by
1,378
References
18
FWCI
27.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Defining postpartum uterine disease in cattle. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.08.021
The paper
Sheldon, I. M., Lewis, G. S., LeBlanc, S., & Gilbert, R. O. (2006). Defining postpartum uterine disease in cattle. Theriogenology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.08.021

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.