Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41945625›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Antimicrobial-resistant pathogens on the plate: A semi-quantitative hygiene risk evaluation of raw beef consumption in Ethiopia within a One Health context.

Daniel Teshome Gebeyehu, Temechew Munaw Abebe, Ayalew Negash Shiferaw, Md Shahidul Islam, Gashaw Enbiyale Kasse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Daniel Teshome GebeyehuSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Wollo University, Dessie, Ethiopia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3325-4571
Temechew Munaw AbebeCollege of Medicine and Health, Injibara University, Injibara, Ethiopia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8038-8505
Ayalew Negash ShiferawSchool of Health, University of New England, Armiale, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2717-6933
Md Shahidul IslamSchool of Health, University of New England, Armiale, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8984-8689
Gashaw Enbiyale KasseSchool of Health, University of New England, Armiale, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4584-0877

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile meat is a valuable source of nutrition, it can also serve as a vehicle for infectious and non-infectious diseases-especially when consumed raw. This risk becomes more serious when the meat harbors antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, often referred to as superbugs. This study assessed the health risks faced by consumers of raw beef in relation to infections from common enteric superbugs commonly transmitted through meat.

methodsThe investigation focused on detecting the prevalence of three key meat-borne bacteria-Salmonella, Shigella, and Escherichia coli-and evaluating their resistance to commonly used antibiotics. Bacterial identification was performed using culture techniques and biochemical tests, while antibiotic susceptibility was assessed via the disc diffusion method. The study also examined food safety practices at restaurants that serve raw beef, including hygiene measures and whether the meat underwent any thermal treatment. Health risk estimation was based on both likelihood factors (bacterial contamination and hygiene practices) and consequence factors (resistance to antibiotic treatments).

resultsMeat samples showed an overall bacterial contamination rate of 45.2%, with E. coli being the most prevalent (62.8%), followed by Shigella (32.7%) and Salmonella (4.4%). Alarmingly, 26.8% of the E. coli isolates were identified as the highly pathogenic E. coli O157:H7 strain. None of the restaurants applied any form of heat treatment (cooking or chilling) to the raw beef before serving, and 76% had poor hygiene practices based on bacterial contamination findings. All isolates were fully resistant to amoxicillin, and Salmonella strains also showed complete resistance to erythromycin. However, all bacteria remained 100% sensitive to chloramphenicol. Most isolates demonstrated multidrug resistance to commonly used antibiotics including ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, erythromycin, and streptomycin. The estimated health risk to raw beef consumers was high, primarily due to significant exposure levels and limited effectiveness of post-exposure treatment options.

conclusionThe combined effects of high bacterial contamination, poor hygiene, lack of heat treatment, and widespread antibiotic resistance pose a potential hygiene-associated risk to raw beef consumers. Reducing this risk requires prompt action, including raising public awareness, enforcing strict meat hygiene standards, and implementing strategies to curb antimicrobial resistance.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialHygieneRed MeatAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCattleEscherichia coliEthiopiaFood ContaminationFood MicrobiologyHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsRisk AssessmentSalmonellaShigellaAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID41945625
PMCPMC13056190

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.