Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32287295›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Fecal shedding of Salmonella spp., Clostridium perfringens, and Clostridioides difficile in dogs fed raw meat-based diets in Brazil and their owners' motivation.

Flavia Mello Viegas, Carolina Pantuzza Ramos, Rafael Gariglio Clark Xavier, Emily Oliveira Lopes, Carlos Augusto Oliveira Júnior, Renata Marques Bagno, Amanda Nadia Diniz, Francisco Carlos Faria Lobato, Rodrigo Otávio Silveira Silva

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Role ofMicroorganisms · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Outbreak of multidrug-resistantLancet regional health. Americas · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A Familiar Outbreak of MonophasicPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Characterization ofVeterinary sciences · 2022
    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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Flavia Mello ViegasDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4641-6576
Carolina Pantuzza RamosDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Rafael Gariglio Clark XavierDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Emily Oliveira LopesDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8205-8465
Carlos Augusto Oliveira JúniorDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Renata Marques BagnoDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Amanda Nadia DinizDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Francisco Carlos Faria LobatoDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Rodrigo Otávio Silveira SilvaDepartment of Preventive Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-0074-2488
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study aimed to explore the motivations of Brazilian dog owners and their knowledge about the risks related to raw meat-based diets (RMBD) as well as to evaluate important enteropathogens such as Salmonella spp., C. perfringens, and C. difficile, in feces of dogs fed different diets. The majority of the pet owners (69.3%) reported to have chosen this diet for their dogs, considering it to be more "natural". A large number of owners declared that RMBD do not pose health risks for their animals (87.9%) or humans (98.8%), even though almost one third of the respondents (34.8%) declared having at least one individual at high risk of infection in contact with RMBD-fed dogs. Stool samples from 46 RMBD-fed dogs and 192 dogs fed commercial dry feed were collected. The present study revealed that dogs fed raw meat diets were almost 30 times more likely to be positive for Salmonella spp. than dogs on a conventional diet. Some of the serovars detected were commonly associated with human salmonellosis, such as S. Typhimurium and S. Saintpaul, and were multidrug resistant. RMBD-fed dogs were more likely to be positive for C. perfringens type A (p = 0.008) and one C. perfringens type F was isolated from these animals. Two toxigenic strains (4.3%) of C. difficile were isolated only from raw meat-fed dogs, all of which were under antibiotic therapy. These toxigenic C. difficile isolates were classified as RT106/ST54 and RT600/ST149, previously associated with infection in dogs and humans. The present work revealed that the owners have a tendency to ignore or are unaware of the risks associated with raw meat diets for dogs. Also, the higher fecal shedding of important enteropathogens in dogs fed RMBD suggests that this diet poses a risk for the animals and the people in contact with them.

Indexed as

Bacterial SheddingFood MicrobiologyAnimalsBrazilClostridioides difficileClostridium perfringensDietDogsFecesHumansMeatMotivationOwnershipRaw FoodsSalmonella

Identifiers

PMID32287295
PMCPMC7156072
OpenAlexW3016060377

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.