Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40182815›Full record

ArticleVeterinary world2025

Antibiogram profile of

Andi Muhamad Isra Nurrahmat, Heru Susetya, Khrisdiana Putri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary world, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Andi Muhamad Isra NurrahmatVeterinary Science Postgraduate Programme, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia.
Heru SusetyaDepartment of Veterinary Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia.
Khrisdiana PutriDepartment of Veterinary Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aim: Enterococci are commensal bacteria in the digestive tract of poultry and serve as indicators of fecal contamination. Their significance in veterinary and human medicine arises from their ability to acquire antibiotic-resistance genes, posing a potential public health risk. Poultry meat, a major protein source in Indonesia, can act as a reservoir for Materials and Methods: Chicken breast samples were randomly collected from three Supermarkets (A, B, and C). Bacterial isolation was performed using buffered peptone water and enterococcosel agar. Presumptive colonies were confirmed by polymerase chain reaction for genus and species identification. Antibiotic susceptibility was assessed using the Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method against ampicillin (AMP), tetracycline (TET), erythromycin (ERY), and vancomycin (VAN). Results: A total of 269 Conclusion: Despite high susceptibility to AMP and VAN, resistance to TET and ERY was prevalent. The presence of MDR isolates underscores the need for continuous surveillance of antibiotic resistance in

Indexed as

antibiotic resistanceEnterococcusfood safetymultidrug resistancesupermarket chicken

Identifiers

PMID40182815
PMCPMC11963579

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.