ArticleMicrobiologyOpen2026
Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus in Wild Animals: A Global Scoping Review.
Article in MicrobiologyOpen, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance is a global One Health concern, and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) remains one of the clinically important resistant bacterial groups. Although VRE has been extensively studied in clinical and livestock settings, it has been investigated far less often in free-ranging wild animals. This scoping review maps the published evidence on VRE in wild animals, with emphasis on reported prevalence, host and environmental correlates, anthropogenic exposures, and laboratory detection methods rather than quantifying pooled effect sizes. A structured search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was conducted from database inception to the final search stage used for this review, with only peer-reviewed English-language primary studies contributing empirical wildlife VRE data included in the synthesis. Eligibility was guided by the Population-Concept-Context framework, and the mapped evidence included mammals plus one reptile study retained in the review scope. Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Most were conducted in Europe, with substantially fewer studies from Africa and South America, indicating major geographical gaps. Reported prevalence ranged from 1.08% in feral pigs in Brazil to 100% in wild rabbits in Spain, although several striking estimates were based on very small samples and should be interpreted cautiously. Culture-based methods were most frequently used, whereas PCR-based approaches were particularly useful for confirming resistance genes. Overall, the evidence suggests that wild animals can act as reservoirs or sentinels of VRE exposure in anthropogenically influenced environments. Standardized surveillance, clearer reporting, and broader One Health monitoring that explicitly includes wildlife are needed.
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.