Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18723661›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2008

Salmonella and Escherichia coli O157:H7 contamination on hides and carcasses of cull cattle presented for slaughter in the United States: an evaluation of prevalence and bacterial loads by immunomagnetic separation and direct plating methods.

Dayna M Brichta-Harhay, Michael N Guerini, Terrance M Arthur, Joseph M Bosilevac, Norasak Kalchayanand, Steven D Shackelford, Tommy L Wheeler, Mohammad Koohmaraie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. A novel approach for detectingFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Use of ProbioticMicroorganisms · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Low Prevalence ofItalian journal of food safety · 2017
    Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Dayna M Brichta-HarhayUS Department of Agriculture, Roman L Hruska US Meat Animal Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, Clay Center, NE 68933-0166, USA. Dayna.Harhay@ars.usda.gov
Michael N Guerini
Terrance M Arthur
Joseph M Bosilevac
Norasak Kalchayanand
Steven D Shackelford
Tommy L Wheeler
Mohammad Koohmaraie

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The hide and carcass hygiene of cull cattle at slaughter in four geographically distant regions of the United States was examined from July 2005 to April 2006 by measuring the aerobic plate counts (APC) and the prevalences and loads of Salmonella and Escherichia coli O157:H7. The geometric mean log(10) APC CFU/100 cm(2) levels on hides and preevisceration and postintervention carcasses ranged from 6.17 to 8.19, 4.24 to 6.47, and 1.46 to 1.96, respectively, and were highest in the summer (P < 0.0001). The average prevalences of Salmonella on hides and preevisceration and postintervention carcasses were 89.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.1 to 94.0), 50.2% (95% CI, 40.9 to 59.5), and 0.8% (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.42), respectively. The prevalences of E. coli O157:H7 were 46.9% (95% CI, 37.3 to 56.6) and 16.7% (95% CI, 9.8 to 23.6) on hides and preevisceration carcasses, respectively. Examination of the concomitant incidence of Salmonella and E. coli O157:H7 showed that, on average, 33.3% (95% CI, 15.9 to 69.8) of cattle hide and 4.1% (95% CI, 0.98 to 17.3) of preevisceration carcass samples were contaminated with both pathogens. The pathogen prevalence on hides and carcasses was not significantly affected by the season; however, significant differences were observed between plants with respect to the incoming pathogen load and the ability to mitigate hide-to-carcass transfer. In spite of these differences, postintervention carcass contamination was significantly reduced (P < 0.001), likely as a result of the use of one or more of the processing interventions employed at each of the four processing plants examined.

Indexed as

Food MicrobiologyAbattoirsAnimalsCattleColony Count, MicrobialEscherichia coli O157Food ContaminationImmunomagnetic SeparationSalmonellaSeasonsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID18723661
PMCPMC2570275

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.