ReviewInfection2016
Corynebacterium diphtheriae in a free-roaming red fox: case report and historical review on diphtheria in animals.
Review in Infection, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans in raw milk of a cow with acute mastitis: case report and historical review on milk-transmitted diphtheria.Infection · 2025Review
- Corynebacteria of theMicrobiology spectrum · 2023Article
- NewPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae Infection in Cat, Texas, USA.Emerging infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Corynebacterium rouxii, a recently described member of the C. diphtheriae group isolated from three dogs with ulcerative skin lesions.Antonie van Leeuwenhoek · 2021Article
- Assessing the Genetic Diversity of Austrian Corynebacterium diphtheriae Clinical Isolates, 2011 to 2019.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- Whole Genome Sequencing for Surveillance of Diphtheria in Low Incidence Settings.Frontiers in public health · 2019Review
- Tox-positive Corynebacterium ulcerans in hedgehogs, GermanyEmerging microbes & infections · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesCorynebacterium diphtheriae, the classical causative agent of diphtheria, is considered to be nearly restricted to humans. Here we report the first finding of a non-toxigenic C. diphtheriae biovar belfanti strain in a free-roaming wild animal.
methodsThe strain obtained from the subcutis and mammary gland of a dead red fox (Vulpes vulpes) was characterized by biochemical and molecular methods including MALDI-TOF and Multi Locus Sequence Typing. Since C. diphtheriae infections of animals, usually with close contact to humans, are reported only very rarely, an intense review comprising also scientific literature from the beginning of the 20th century was performed.
resultsBesides the present case, only 11 previously reported C. diphtheriae animal infections could be verified using current scientific criteria.
conclusionsOur report is the first on the isolation of C. diphtheriae from a wildlife animal without any previous human contact. In contrast, the very few unambiguous publications on C. diphtheriae in animals referred to livestock or pet animals with close human contact. C. diphtheriae carriage in animals has to be considered as an exceptionally rare event.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.