Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32881949›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Antimicrobial resistance in ovine bacteria: A sheep in wolf's clothing?

Nuno Silva, Clare J Phythian, Carol Currie, Riccardo Tassi, Keith T Ballingall, Giada Magro, Tom N McNeilly, Ruth N Zadoks

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Unravelling the Diversity and Abundance of the Red Fox (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  2. First Global Report of Plasmid-MediatedAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  3. Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    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 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Nuno SilvaMoredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Penicuik, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0842-5412
Clare J PhythianInstitute for Production Animal Clinical Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Sandnes, Norway.
Carol CurrieMoredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Penicuik, United Kingdom.
Riccardo TassiMoredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Penicuik, United Kingdom.
Keith T BallingallMoredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Penicuik, United Kingdom.
Giada MagroMoredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Penicuik, United Kingdom.
Tom N McNeillyMoredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Penicuik, United Kingdom.
Ruth N ZadoksMoredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Penicuik, United Kingdom.
Moredun Research Institute · GBNorwegian University of Life Sciences · NOThe University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo monitor the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), methods for interpretation of susceptibility phenotypes of bacteria are needed. Reference limits to declare resistance are generally based on or dominated by data from human bacterial isolates and may not reflect clinical relevance or wild type (WT) populations in livestock or other hosts.

methodsWe compared the observed prevalence of AMR using standard and bespoke interpretations based on clinical breakpoints or epidemiological cut-offs (ECOFF) using gram positive (Staphylococcus aureus) and gram negative (Escherichia coli) bacteria from sheep as exemplars. Isolates were obtained from a cross-sectional study in three lowland sheep flocks in Scotland, and from a longitudinal study in one flock in Norway. S. aureus (n = 101) was predominantly isolated from milk or mammary glands whilst E. coli (n = 103) was mostly isolated from faecal samples. Disc diffusion testing was used to determine inhibition zone diameters, which were interpreted using either clinical breakpoints or ECOFF, which distinguish the bacterial wild type population from bacteria with acquired or mutational resistance to the compound of interest (non-wild type). Standard ECOFF values were considered as well as sheep-specific values calculated from the data using Normalized Resistance Interpretation (NRI) methodology.

resultsThe prevalence of AMR as measured based on clinical breakpoints was low, e.g. 4.0% for penicillin resistance in S. aureus. Estimation of AMR prevalence based on standard ECOFFs was hampered by lack of relevant reference values. In addition, standard ECOFFS, which are predominantly based on human data, bisected the normal distribution of inhibition zone diameters for several compounds in our analysis of sheep isolates. This contravenes recommendations for ECOFF setting based on NRI methodology and may lead to high apparent AMR prevalence. Using bespoke ECOFF values based on NRI, S. aureus showed non-wild type for less than 4% of isolates across 13 compounds, and ca. 13% non-wild type for amoxicillin and ampicillin, while E. coli showed non-wild type for less than 3% of isolates across 12 compounds, and ca. 13% non-wild type for tetracyclines and sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim.

conclusionThe apparent prevalence of AMR in bacteria isolated from sheep is highly dependent on interpretation criteria. The sheep industry may want to establish bespoke cut-off values for AMR monitoring to avoid the use of cut-offs developed for other host species. The latter could lead to high apparent prevalence of resistance, including to critically important antimicrobial classes such as 4th generation cephalosporins and carbapenems, suggesting an AMR problem that may not actually exist.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialAnimalsEscherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPrevalenceSheepStaphylococcal InfectionsStaphylococcus aureus

Identifiers

PMID32881949
PMCPMC7470381
OpenAlexW3083636485

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.