Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30042741›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2018

Interpreting Whole-Genome Sequence Analyses of Foodborne Bacteria for Regulatory Applications and Outbreak Investigations.

Arthur W Pightling, James B Pettengill, Yan Luo, Joseph D Baugher, Hugh Rand, Errol Strain

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 157 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
157citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Type VI Secretion Systems inMicroorganisms · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Probing Genomic Diversity ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Genomic epidemiology ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

97 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Arthur W PightlingBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD, United States.
James B PettengillBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD, United States.
Yan LuoBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD, United States.
Joseph D BaugherBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD, United States.
Hugh RandBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD, United States.
Errol StrainBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole-genome sequence (WGS) analysis has revolutionized the food safety industry by enabling high-resolution typing of foodborne bacteria. Higher resolving power allows investigators to identify origins of contamination during illness outbreaks and regulatory activities quickly and accurately. Government agencies and industry stakeholders worldwide are now analyzing WGS data routinely. Although researchers have published many studies that assess the efficacy of WGS data analysis for source attribution, guidance for interpreting WGS analyses is lacking. Here, we provide the framework for interpreting WGS analyses used by the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN). We based this framework on the experiences of CFSAN investigators, collaborations and interactions with government and industry partners, and evaluation of the published literature. A fundamental question for investigators is whether two or more bacteria arose from the same source of contamination. Analysts often count the numbers of nucleotide differences [single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)] between two or more genome sequences to measure genetic distances. However, using SNP thresholds alone to assess whether bacteria originated from the same source can be misleading. Bacteria that are isolated from food, environmental, or clinical samples are representatives of bacterial populations. These populations are subject to evolutionary forces that can change genome sequences. Therefore, interpreting WGS analyses of foodborne bacteria requires a more sophisticated approach. Here, we present a framework for interpreting WGS analyses that combines SNP counts with phylogenetic tree topologies and bootstrap support. We also clarify the roles of WGS, epidemiological, traceback, and other evidence in forming the conclusions of investigations. Finally, we present examples that illustrate the application of this framework to real-world situations.

Indexed as

Escherichia coligenomic epidemiologyinterpretationListeria monocytogenesoutbreak investigationphylogeneticsSalmonella entericawhole-genome sequence

Identifiers

PMID30042741
PMCPMC6048267

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.