ArticlePloS one2026
Microbiological quality assessment of potential pathogenic bacteria and multidrug resistance patterns in commercial electrolyte drinks in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
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.
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
Local electrolyte drinks in Bangladesh are produced without approval from the Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution (BSTI). Hence, this study aimed to identify foodborne bacteria from electrolyte drinks and their antimicrobial resistance profiles to assess microbiological safety. A total of 40 electrolyte drink samples, representing 9 local brands in Dhaka, were evaluated for microbiological quality. Bacteria were present in all samples. Around 40% of the samples exceeded the aerobic plate count limit established by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Additionally, 55% of the samples tested positive for fecal contamination, surpassing the accepted limit set by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Both Gram-negative (Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Vibrio spp.) and Gram-positive (Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, and Listeria spp.) bacteria were identified. Each sample contained more than one bacterial species. A total of 110 isolates from each culture-positive sample were screened for antimicrobial susceptibility. Multidrug resistance varied among all Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial species. The highest level of resistance was seen in broad-spectrum antibiotics (amoxicillin, ampicillin, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, and cefepime). About 28% of Gram-positive and 19% of Gram-negative bacteria were hemolytic. Coagulase was found in 34% of the Staphylococcus aureus isolates. Moreover, 26% of the Gram-positive and 30% of the Gram-negative isolates were found to be resistant to human serum treatment. Such resistant bacteria found in popular electrolyte drinks thus represent a major health risk.
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.