Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35441892›Full record

ArticleArchives of microbiology2022

Evaluation of the different methods to detect Salmonella in poultry feces samples.

Reza Khaltabadi Farahani, Maryam Meskini, Arash Ghalyanchi Langeroudi, Safoora Gharibzadeh, Soumya Ghosh, Amir Hossien Khaltabadi Farahani

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of microbiology, 2022. 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 29% 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Occurrence and distribution ofItalian journal of food safety · 2023
    Article
  3. One-Pot Synthesis of Enzyme and Antibody/CaHPOSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Reza Khaltabadi Farahani *Department of Molecular Biology, Pasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran.
Maryam Meskini *Microbiology Research Center, Pasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran.
Arash Ghalyanchi LangeroudiDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Safoora GharibzadehDepartment of Epidemiology, Pasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran.
Soumya GhoshDepartment of Genetics, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, 9301, South Africa.
Amir Hossien Khaltabadi FarahaniDepartment of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Arak University, Arak, Iran. amfarahanikh@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5805-590X
Pasteur Institute of Iran · IRArak University · IRUniversity of Tehran · IRUniversity of the Free State · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Salmonella is one of the most common causes of foodborne outbreaks and infection worldwide. The gold-standard detection method of Salmonella is cultivation. There is a need to investigate rapid and accurate processes with time-consuming cultivation. The study evaluated different approaches to detect Salmonella in poultry feces samples. Poultry farm feces samples from 21 cities in Iran were collected from January 2016 to December 2019. Microbiological cultures, serological assays, and multiplex PCR (m-PCR) were used to detect and characterize Salmonella spp. isolates. Serological assays and m-PCR were used to determine the serogroups A, B, C1, C2, D1, E, H, and FliC. The m-PCR was used to detect seven Salmonella serovars, and a Chi-square test was performed to compare the discriminatory power of the methods. Of 2300 poultry feces samples, 173 (7.5%) and 166 (7.2%) samples were detected as Salmonella spp. by cultivation and m-PCR, respectively. The sensitivity of the molecular method was equal to cultivation at 0.96 (CI = 95%). Assessment of H antigenic subgroups showed the same for both m-PCR and serological tests. Therefore, the matching rate of the two methods for detecting all H antigenic subgroups was 100%. Thus, the relationship between the results obtained from both methods was significant in the contingency table test (P < 0.01). The PCR-based approach confirmed the detection of Salmonella in a shorter period (24-36 h) compared to the conventional microbiological approach (3-8 days).

Indexed as

PoultrySalmonellaAnimalsFecesMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionSerogroupCultureFecesMultiplex PCRPoultrySalmonella

Identifiers

PMID35441892
OpenAlexW4225722685

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.