Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31682558›Full record

ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)

PulseNet and the Changing Paradigm of Laboratory-Based Surveillance for Foodborne Diseases.

Kristy A Kubota, William J Wolfgang, Deborah J Baker, David Boxrud, Lauren Turner, Eija Trees, Heather A Carleton, Peter Gerner-Smidt

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Microorganisms · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Outbreak of multidrug-resistantLancet regional health. Americas · 2024
    Article
  12. Epidemiology and infection · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Challenges Associated with InvestigatingFoodborne pathogens and disease · 2023
    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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Kristy A KubotaAssociation of Public Health Laboratories, Food Safety Program, Silver Spring, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4078-735X
William J WolfgangNew York State Department of Health, Bacteriology Laboratory, Albany, NY, USA.
Deborah J BakerNew York State Department of Health, Bacteriology Laboratory, Albany, NY, USA.
David BoxrudPublic Health Laboratory Division, Minnesota Department of Health, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Lauren TurnerVirginia Department of General Services, Division of Consolidated Laboratory Services, Richmond, VA, USA.
Eija TreesAssociation of Public Health Laboratories, Food Safety Program, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Heather A CarletonEnteric Diseases Laboratory Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Peter Gerner-SmidtEnteric Diseases Laboratory Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Association of Public Health Laboratories · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USNew York State Department of Health · USDepartment of General Services · USMinnesota Department of Health · US

Funding

OSELS CDC HHS U60 OE000103
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PulseNet, the National Molecular Subtyping Network for Foodborne Disease Surveillance, was established in 1996 through a collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the US Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service; the US Food and Drug Administration; 4 state public health laboratories; and the Association of Public Health Laboratories. The network has since expanded to include 83 state, local, and food regulatory public health laboratories. In 2016, PulseNet was estimated to be helping prevent an estimated 270 000 foodborne illnesses annually. PulseNet is undergoing a transformation toward whole-genome sequencing (WGS), which provides better discriminatory power and precision than pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). WGS improves the detection of outbreak clusters and could replace many traditional reference identification and characterization methods. This article highlights the contributions made by public health laboratories in transforming PulseNet's surveillance and describes how the transformation is changing local and national surveillance practices. Our data show that WGS is better at identifying clusters than PFGE, especially for clonal organisms such as

Indexed as

LaboratoriesPublic HealthPublic Health SurveillanceDisease OutbreaksElectrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-FieldFoodborne DiseasesHumansUnited StatesWhole Genome Sequencingfoodborne diseaseslaboratorysurveillance

Identifiers

PMID31682558
PMCPMC6832030
OpenAlexW2988197090

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.