ArticleJournal of food protection2016
Molecular Subtyping and Source Attribution of Campylobacter Isolated from Food Animals.
Article in Journal of food protection, 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection ofVeterinary world · 2024Article
- Phylogenetic Analysis Reveals Source Attribution Patterns forMicroorganisms · 2021Article
- Article
- Core Genome Multilocus Sequence Typing for Food Animal Source Attribution of HumanPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Article
- Prevalence, Virulence, and Antimicrobial Resistance ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- High Prevalence of Fluoroquinolone-ResistantApplied and environmental microbiology · 2019Article
- The Current State of Macrolide Resistance in Campylobacter spp.: Trends and Impacts of Resistance Mechanisms.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Campylobacter spp. commonly cause gastrointestinal illness in humans. Poultry meats have long been considered the predominant source of these infections, but few in-depth Campylobacter source attribution studies have been completed. We analyzed more than 1,300 Campylobacter isolates recovered from a number of animal and food sources, including dairy and beef cattle, pigs, poultry, and retail poultry meat, and compared them with Campylobacter isolates recovered from human clinical samples. Each isolate was subtyped using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) with SmaI and queried against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention PulseNet database to identify human isolates with indistinguishable patterns. Half (49.5%) of the PFGE patterns from poultry animal and retail meat isolates were indistinguishable from patterns of at least one human isolate. Among the isolates from beef and dairy cows, 56.6 and 65.0%, respectively, of their PFGE patterns were indistinguishable from those of human isolates. Only a small portion of the PFGE patterns of Campylobacter isolated from pigs (9.5%) were found to have PFGE patterns in common with human isolates. These data imply that cattle may be larger contributors to Campylobacter infections than previously recognized and help further our understanding of potential sources of human campylobacteriosis.
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.