Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26733732›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire2016

Drug use and antimicrobial resistance among Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp. isolates from chicken and turkey flocks slaughtered in Quebec, Canada.

Martine Boulianne, Julie Arsenault, Danielle Daignault, Marie Archambault, Ann Letellier, Lucie Dutil

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Antimicrobial Resistance in SelectedAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  3. Genomic Characterization of Multiple Antibiotic-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiles ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiles ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  8. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiles ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  9. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiles of CommensalAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  10. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiles of CommensalAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Antimicrobial susceptibility profiles ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  13. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiles of CommensalAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Antimicrobial resistance profiles ofJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2023
    Article
  17. Potency ofVeterinary and animal science · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Martine BoulianneFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Boulianne, Arsenault, Archambault, Letellier); Laboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses, Public Health Agency of Canada, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Daignault, Dutil).
Julie ArsenaultFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Boulianne, Arsenault, Archambault, Letellier); Laboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses, Public Health Agency of Canada, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Daignault, Dutil).
Danielle DaignaultFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Boulianne, Arsenault, Archambault, Letellier); Laboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses, Public Health Agency of Canada, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Daignault, Dutil).
Marie ArchambaultFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Boulianne, Arsenault, Archambault, Letellier); Laboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses, Public Health Agency of Canada, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Daignault, Dutil).
Ann LetellierFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Boulianne, Arsenault, Archambault, Letellier); Laboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses, Public Health Agency of Canada, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Daignault, Dutil).
Lucie DutilFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Université de Montréal, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Boulianne, Arsenault, Archambault, Letellier); Laboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses, Public Health Agency of Canada, 3200 Sicotte, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6 (Daignault, Dutil).
Université de Montréal · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An observational study was conducted of chicken and turkey flocks slaughtered at federal processing plants in the province of Quebec, Canada. The objectives were to estimate prevalence of drug use at hatchery and on farm and to identify antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in cecal Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp. isolates and factors associated with AMR. Eighty-two chicken flocks and 59 turkey flocks were sampled. At the hatchery, the most used antimicrobial was ceftiofur in chickens (76% of flocks) and spectinomycin in turkeys (42% of flocks). Virginiamycin was the antimicrobial most frequently added to the feed in both chicken and turkey flocks. At least 1 E. coli isolate resistant to third-generation cephalosporins was present in all chicken flocks and in a third of turkey flocks. Resistance to tetracycline, streptomycin, and sulfisoxazole was detected in > 90% of flocks for E. coli isolates. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) was observed to bacitracin, erythromycin, lincomycin, quinupristin-dalfopristin, and tetracycline in both chicken and turkey flocks for Enterococcus spp. isolates. No resistance to vancomycin was observed. The use of ceftiofur at hatchery was significantly associated with the proportion of ceftiofur-resistant E. coli isolates in chicken flocks. In turkey flocks, ceftiofur resistance was more frequent when turkeys were placed on litter previously used by chickens. Associations between drug use and resistance were observed with tetracycline (turkey) in E. coli isolates and with bacitracin (chicken and turkey), gentamicin (turkey), and tylosin (chicken) in Enterococcus spp. isolates. Further studies are needed to provide producers and veterinarians with alternative management practices and tools in order to reduce the use of antimicrobial feed additives in poultry.

Indexed as

ChickensDrug Resistance, BacterialTurkeysAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsEscherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsHumansNew BrunswickNova ScotiaPoultry DiseasesQuebecSurveys and QuestionnairesAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID26733732
PMCPMC4686034
OpenAlexW2399952481

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.