ArticleEpidemiology and infection2016
Molecular characterization and antimicrobial resistance of STEC strains isolated from healthy cattle in 2011 and 2013 in Spain.
Article in Epidemiology and infection, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence, O-genotype and Shiga toxin (Stx) 2 subtype of Stx-producing Escherichia coli strains isolated from Argentinean beef cattle.The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2021Article
- Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Resistance in Non-O157 Shiga Toxin-ProducingFrontiers in veterinary science · 2020Article
- Zoonotic approach to Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli: integrated analysis of virulence and antimicrobial resistance in ruminants and humans.Epidemiology and infection · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prevention of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) foodborne outbreaks is hampered by its complex epidemiology. We assessed the distribution of virulence genes (VGs), main serogroups/serotypes for public health [haemolytic uraemic syndrome (HUS)-related], antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profiles and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) patterns in a collection of STEC isolates obtained from cattle hide (n = 149) and faecal (n = 406) samples collected during a national survey conducted in Spain in 2011 and 2013. Isolates were cultured using McConkey and CT-SMAC agar after enrichment, and confirmed as STEC by PCR. STEC prevalence in hides (15·4%) was higher than in faeces (10·7%) and O157:H7 was more frequent in the former (2·7% vs. 0·99%). Non-O157 HUS-related serogroups were present albeit at low frequencies. The non-O157 isolates were more heterogeneous than O157:H7 in their VG patterns, with 25/64 presenting VGs from both STEC and enterotoxigenic pathotypes (hybrid isolates). Of the STEC isolates, 62·5% were resistant at least to one antimicrobial, and no differences in AMR between O157:H7 and non-O157 were detected. All isolates had different profiles by PFGE and did not form a cluster. Overall, our results demonstrated that STEC in the cattle reservoir is still a matter of concern for human health due to the presence of HUS-related serogroups, the occurrence of certain VGs, AMR and the additional risks that hybrid isolates may pose, and thus warrants further investigation.
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.