ArticleSaudi medical journal2014
Clostridium difficile in retail baskets, trolleys, conveyor belts, and plastic bags in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Probiotic-infused activated charcoal/ hydroxyapatite microbeads: a novel strategy to disinfection.PeerJ · 2026Article
- Novel ribotype/sequence type associations and diverse CRISPR-Cas systems in environmental Clostridioides difficile strains from northern Iraq.FEMS microbiology letters · 2023Article
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Frequency of Antibiotic-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Matrix Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry for identification of Clostridium species isolated from Saudi Arabia.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]Article
- Conventional and alternative treatment approaches forInternational journal of health sciencesReview
- Detection ofSaudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology AssociationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) prevalence on retail surfaces and shoppers plastic bags.
methodsFrom 20 June to 10 August 2011, in a cross-sectional epidemiological study, 17 supermarkets from 2 cities, Albaha and Altaif, Saudi Arabia were sampled. A total of 800 samples, which comprised 200 samples per surveyed surface, were studied. These included baskets, trolleys, conveyer belts, and outgoing shoppers' plastic bags. Clostridium difficile strains were isolated. The isolates were characterized using ribotyping and polymerase chain reaction for the detection of toxin A (tcdA), toxin B (tcdB), binary toxin (cdtB), and toxin C (tcdC) genes. Susceptibility to antibiotics was determined on a Muller-Hinton agar with 5% sheep blood agar using E-tests.
resultsOverall, the C. difficile prevalence on sampled surfaces was 0.75%. The highest prevalence was found on retail baskets and trolleys, followed by plastic bags. A total of 5 different ribotypes were identified. Alterations in tcdC were detected in ribotype 027 and BT1. All the identified isolates were susceptible to vancomycin, but resistant to levofloxacin.
conclusionIn this study, C. difficile was present at a rate of 0.75% on supermarket surfaces. Spore disinfection of implicated surfaces may be necessary to control any community-acquired infections caused by this pathogen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25316477PMC4362112W1494551849What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.