Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16000449›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2005

Characterization of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium isolates from broiler poultry and pig farms in England and Wales.

L Garcia-Migura, E Pleydell, S Barnes, R H Davies, E Liebana

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Tracking the Prevalence of Antibiotic Resistance inAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Antimicrobial Resistance inMicrobiology spectrum · 2018
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors.

L Garcia-MiguraDepartment of Food and Environmental Safety, Veterinary Laboratories Agency-Weybridge, Addlestone, Surrey KT15 3NB, United Kingdom.
E Pleydell
S Barnes
R H Davies
E Liebana

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the occurrence and molecular epidemiology of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF) isolates on poultry and pig farms in England and Wales. A total of 217 VREF isolates were obtained from fresh feces and environmental swabs collected from conventional and organic farms. A predominant pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) profile was found for each VREF-positive farm, together with less frequent types. All isolates presented the vanA genotype and were esp negative. Seventy-six percent of the VREF isolates were additionally resistant to nine or more antimicrobials, presenting a diverse range of resistance phenotypes. The multiresistance traits did not appear to be specific to individual farms or sample types (i.e., environmental or fecal), nor did they correlate with any specific PFGE type. Ninety-three percent of the isolates were resistant to penicillin, 89% were resistant to tetracycline, 87.5% were resistant to erythromycin, and 50% were resistant to quinupristin-dalfospristin (Synercid). The lack of clonality among these populations may suggest the horizontal transfer of resistance genes and/or a dynamic replacement of clonal lines rather than persistence.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryVancomycin ResistanceAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsChickensDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialElectrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-FieldEnglandEnterococcus faeciumGram-Positive Bacterial InfectionsMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPoultry DiseasesSwineSwine DiseasesWalesAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID16000449
PMCPMC1169128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.