Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25420512›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2014

Occurrence of Clostridium difficile in seasoned hamburgers and seven processing plants in Iran.

Zahra Esfandiari, Scott Weese, Hamid Ezzatpanah, Mohammad Jalali, Mohammad Chamani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Global and Historical Distribution ofFrontiers in medicine · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Community-AcquiredInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. The Role ofMicroorganisms · 2025
    Review
  6. Prevalence and Antibiotic Resistance of Clostridioides (Iranian journal of public health · 2023
    Review
  7. Raw Animal Meats as Potential Sources ofFood science of animal resources · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Detection, Characterization and Antibiotic Susceptibility ofFood science of animal resources · 2020
    Article
  10. Microorganisms · 2019
    Review
  11. Prevalence ofKorean journal for food science of animal resources · 2018
    Article
  12. Clostridium difficile in Food and Animals: A Comprehensive Review.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2016
    Review
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.

Zahra EsfandiariDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. research_esfandiary@mui.ac.ir.
Scott WeeseDepartment of Pathobiology and Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont, N1G2W1, Canada. jsweese@uoguelph.ca.
Hamid EzzatpanahDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. hamidezzatpanah@srbiau.ac.ir.
Mohammad JalaliDepartment of Pathobiology and Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont, N1G2W1, Canada. mjalali@uoguelph.ca.
Mohammad ChamaniDepartment of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Tehran Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. m.chamani@srbiau.ac.ir.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe recent increment of the incidence of Community Associated Clostridium difficile Infection (CA)-CDI has led to speculation that this disease is associated to foodborne transmission. Therefore it is critical to establish the community sources of CDI in order to implement the appropriate interventions. The present study was conducted to evaluate the prevalence of C. difficile in seasoned hamburger and examine the sources of C. difficile dispersal in hamburger processing plants. A total of 211 samples including hamburger ingredients, the final product, processing equipment and food contact surfaces were collected from seven hamburger processing plants to evaluate the routes of dispersal of C. difficile. The samples were assessed for the occurrence of C. difficile using culture and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods. All isolates were screened for the existence of toxin A, B and binary toxin genes. In addition, isolates were subjected to PCR ribotyping.

resultsOverall, 9/211 (4.2%) samples were positive. Toxigenic C. difficile were detected from 2/7 (28.5%) hamburger processing plants, in (3/54) 5.6% of beef meat samples, (2/56) 3.5% of swabs taken from the environment and (4/56) 7.1% of hamburger samples after both molding and freezing. C. difficile was not found in 45 non-meat ingredients including 14 defrosted onions, 14 textured soy proteins and 17 seasonings. All isolates contained tcdB gene while 7 strains were positive for tcdA and two remaining strains were negative for tcdA. None of the isolates harbored binary toxin gene (cdtB). PCR ribotyping of 9 isolates categorized into four ribotypes (IR21, IR 22, IR 23 and IR24). Ribotype IR 22 was the most common type 6/9 (66.6%) found. This genotype was isolated from raw meat, environmental samples and hamburger after both forming and freezing in one processing plant, suggesting raw beef meat as a possible major source of contamination.

conclusionsHyper-virulent strains of ribotype were not found in this study however, occurrence of other toxicgenic strains indicate the public health significance of contamination of this product.

Indexed as

Environmental MicrobiologyFood MicrobiologyBacterial ToxinsClostridioides difficileFood-Processing IndustryGenetic VariationIranPrevalenceRibotypingBacterial Toxins

Identifiers

PMID25420512
PMCPMC4247873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.