ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2025
Genomic dissection of the antimicrobial resistance epidemiology of
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- CharacterizingmSystems · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Methods: Publicly available genomes of ~65,000 STm isolates were characterized using Multilevel Genome Typing (MGT). Resistance was predicted to 14 clinically-relevant antibiotics. Resistance patterns were analyzed by MGT sequence type (ST), geographic location, year of collection, and source. MGT ST where ≥80% isolates were predicted to be resistant to an antibiotic were defined as a resistant ST for that antibiotic. Results: About half of all STm isolates were predicted to be resistant to ≥1 antibiotic. Resistance frequencies varied substantially by country, collection year and MGT ST, and 407 resistant MGT STs were identified. Among the most recent isolates (2021-2022), eight MGT STs were classified as cefotaxime resistant and three as ciprofloxacin intermediate. Cefotaxime resistant MGT STs predominantly included isolates from cattle/poultry in the USA. Ciprofloxacin intermediate MGT STs were mainly linked to swine from the UK. Discussion: This large-scale genomic analysis highlights substantial diversity in AMR patterns among STm genomic types globally. The identification of recently emerged cefotaxime resistant and ciprofloxacin intermediate STs underscores the continued threat of resistance to antibiotics critical for treatment of severe salmonellosis. Integration of MGT strain typing with AMR prediction provides scalable, sharable, standardised and precise tracking of resistant isolates/STs, offering a powerful framework for global AMR surveillance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.