Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18505198›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire2008

Antimicrobial resistance in generic fecal Escherichia coil obtained from beef cattle on arrival at the feedlot and prior to slaughter, and associations with volume of total individual cattle antimicrobial treatments in one western Canadian feedlot.

Sylvia L Checkley, John R Campbell, Manuel Chirino-Trejo, Eugene D Janzen, John J McKinnon

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Phenotypic and Genotypic Analysis of Antimicrobial Resistance inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Sylvia L CheckleyFood Safety Division, Alberta Agriculture and Food, 116B, 6909-116 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T6H 4P2. sylvia.checkley@gov.ab.ca
John R Campbell
Manuel Chirino-Trejo
Eugene D Janzen
John J McKinnon
Agriculture and Food · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A prospective observational study was carried out to examine antimicrobial resistance patterns of fecal Escherichia coli isolates of calves on arrival at the feedlot, and then evaluate the associations between the total volume of antimicrobial used for disease treatment and changes in antimicrobial resistance, during the feeding period. No macrolides or tetracyclines were administered in the feed during this study. On arrival, at the animal level, all 3 isolates obtained from 36.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 29.0 to 44.8] of all cattle sampled (n = 153), were susceptible to all antimicrobials, while 5.9% (95% CI: 2.7 to 10.9) of cattle had at least 1 isolate that was resistant to--3 antimicrobials out of the 7 antimicrobials tested. The most frequent antimicrobials for which resistance was observed were sulphamethoxazole, ampicillin, and tetracycline where, of all cattle, 44.4% (95% CI: 36.4 to 52.7), 20.3% (95% CI: 14.2 to 27.5), and 17.7% (95% CI: 12.0 to 24.6), respectively had at least 1 resistant isolate. All cattle received antimicrobial metaphylaxis on arrival at the feedlot. Antimicrobial use was described for a cohort of 95 cattle. Antimicrobials were given to 42 of the 95 cattle during the feeding period, to treat disease. Amongst the 42 treated cattle, there were a total of 133 animal daily doses (ADD(Feedlot)), where 1 ADD(Feedlot) represented 1 day of antimicrobial treatment received by a feedlot animal at the approved dose. Only 1 ADD(Feedlot) was given in the 100 days immediately prior to slaughter. There were no associations found between antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance in this study.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialAge FactorsAnimal FeedAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnimals, NewbornAnti-Bacterial AgentsCanadaCattleCattle DiseasesColony Count, MicrobialDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialEscherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsFecesAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID18505198
PMCPMC2276894
OpenAlexW1502549942

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.