Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33776309›Full record

ArticleVeterinary world2021

Antimicrobial-resistant non-typhoidal

Peter D Fowler, Sumit Sharma, Dhan Kumar Pant, Subir Singh, Melinda J Wilkins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary world, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

Peter D FowlerDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, USA.
Sumit SharmaDepartment of Veterinary Physiology and Biochemistry, Faculty of Animal Science, Veterinary Science and Fisheries, Agriculture and Forestry University, Rampur, Chitwan, 44200, Nepal.
Dhan Kumar PantNational Zoonoses and Food Hygiene Research Centre, G.P.O. Box: 1885, Kathmandu, 44600, Nepal.
Subir SinghDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Animal Science, Veterinary Science and Fisheries, Agriculture and Forestry University, Rampur, Chitwan, 44200, Nepal.
Melinda J WilkinsDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimAntibiotic-resistant infections are one of the leading threats to public health globally. Indiscriminate use of antibiotics in food animal production is an important driver of resistance, particularly among foodborne pathogens such as non-typhoidal MATERIALS AND

methodsA mixture of purposive and judgment sampling of 18 poultry farms and 20 slaughterhouses representing a broad geographic distribution across multiple municipalities in Chitwan was conducted in May 2019. Environmental samples taken from poultry farms included: Water, litter, feces, feed, farm swabs, and eggshell swabs. Biological samples taken from nearby slaughterhouses included: Muscle, heart, liver, skin, cecum, crop, and spleen. Samples were cultured and tested for the presence of NTS. Positive isolates were serotyped and tested for antimicrobial susceptibility to seven antibiotics known to be important to both human and animal health regionally. Farm practices were also characterized through a survey, the results of which are detailed in the accompanying paper.

resultsOut of 708 samples (288 environmental and 420 biological), 103 (15%) tested positive for NTS (9% of environmental; n=26, 18% of biological; n=77). The percentage of positive environmental and biological samples varied by source. Environmental sample positive rates were water (27.5%), feces (10.6%), litter (8.6%), farm swabs (5%), feed (1.8%), and eggshells (0%). Biological sample positive rates were skin (28%), heart (23%), crop (20%), muscle (15%), liver (15%), spleen (15%), and cecum (12%). Out of 103 positive

conclusionNTS is highly prevalent among Chitwan's growing poultry industry with higher rates of positivity found in slaughterhouse samples compared with environmental samples from farms. In addition, a high rate of AMR (78%) was revealed, and an extremely concerning number of those were shown to be MDR (20%). This baseline data has important implications for poultry production and consumption in the region. Further research will elucidate the extent to which this contamination and drug resistance is impacting the health of the local population and help inform treatment and management strategies.

Indexed as

antibiotic resistanceNepalnon-typhoidal Salmonellapoultryserotype

Identifiers

PMID33776309
PMCPMC7994139

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.