Apramycin resistance in bacteria isolated from animals: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

J Scott Weese, Heather E Weese

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis

In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne, 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

2 authors.

J Scott WeeseDepartment of Pathobiology, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario (J. Weese); Moffat, Ontario (H. Weese).

Heather E WeeseDepartment of Pathobiology, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario (J. Weese); Moffat, Ontario (H. Weese).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To identify and assess published data pertaining to apramycin resistance in bacteria isolated from animals, in order to inform discussions related to the potential repurposing of apramycin for use in humans. Animals and procedure: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that reported apramycin susceptibility testing in bacteria from animals. Results: Seventy-three references were included. Apramycin resistance was uncommon in Conclusion and clinical relevance: The low overall resistance rates, despite decades of apramycin use, are encouraging. However, the apparent increase over time for

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDrug Resistance, BacterialNebramycinSalmonellaAnimalsCattleEscherichia coliSwineAnti-Bacterial AgentsapramycinNebramycin

Identifiers

PMID42368696

PMCPMC13295278

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.