Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30698495›Full record

ArticleMicrobial drug resistance (Larchmont, N.Y.)2019

Antimicrobial Resistance and Biofilm Formation in Enterococcus spp. Isolated from Humans and Turkeys in Poland.

Anna Woźniak-Biel, Gabriela Bugla-Płoskońska, Jakub Burdzy, Kamila Korzekwa, Sebastian Ploch, Alina Wieliczko

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial drug resistance (Larchmont, N.Y.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.6field-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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Global trends in antimicrobial resistance ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profiles of CommensalAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. An Overview of the Factors Involved in Biofilm Production by theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anna Woźniak-Biel1 Department of Epizootiology with Clinic of Birds and Exotic Animals, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland.
Gabriela Bugla-Płoskońska2 Department of Microbiology, Institute of Genetics and Microbiology, University of Wroclaw, Wroclaw, Poland.
Jakub Burdzy2 Department of Microbiology, Institute of Genetics and Microbiology, University of Wroclaw, Wroclaw, Poland.
Kamila Korzekwa2 Department of Microbiology, Institute of Genetics and Microbiology, University of Wroclaw, Wroclaw, Poland.
Sebastian Ploch3 IT Lab, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland.
Alina Wieliczko1 Department of Epizootiology with Clinic of Birds and Exotic Animals, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland.
University of Wrocław · PLWrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Enterococci are a natural component of the intestinal flora of many organisms, including humans and birds. As opportunistic pathogens, they can cause fatal infections of the urinary tract and endocarditis in humans, whereas in poultry symptoms are joint disease, sepsis, and falls in the first week of life. The study covered 107 Enterococcus strains-56 isolated from humans and 51 from turkeys. Among the isolates investigated Enterococcus faecalis was detected in 80.36% of human and 80.39% of turkey samples. Enterococcus faecium was identified in 8.93% of human and 17.65% of turkey strains. The highest percentage of the strains was resistant to tetracycline as follows: 48 (85.71%) and 48 (94.12%) of human and turkey strains, respectively. Resistance to erythromycin occurred in 37.50% of the human and in 76.47% of turkey strains, otherwise 27.10% of all strains showed resistance to ciprofloxacin. Our study revealed that 25% of human and 15.69% of turkey strains were resistant to vancomycin. Multidrug resistance showed in 32.14% and 43.14% of human and turkey strains, respectively. The tetracycline resistance gene, tetM, was detected in 82.24% of all strains analyzed, whereas the tetO gene was found in 53.57% of human but only in 7.84% of turkey strains. The vancomycin resistance gene (vanA) was detected in seven Enterococcus strains (six isolated from turkeys and one from humans). The ermB gene (resistance to macrolide) was detected in 55.14% of all isolates (42.86% of human and 68.63% of turkey strains), whereas the ermA gene was detected in 17.65% of turkey but only in 3.57% of human isolates. All the strains had the ability to form biofilms. A stronger biofilm was formed after 24-hour incubation by strains isolated from turkeys, whereas after 48 hours of incubation all examined strains produced strong biofilm.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBiofilmsDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialEnterococcusEnterococcus faecalisEnterococcus faeciumGram-Positive Bacterial InfectionsHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPolandTurkeysAnti-Bacterial Agentsbiofilmmultidrug resistanceresistance genes

Identifiers

PMID30698495
PMCPMC6441282
OpenAlexW2914161197

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.