↓ Skip to main content

Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacterial Poultry Pathogens: A Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
21 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
291 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
732 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacterial Poultry Pathogens: A Review
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2017.00126
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nguyen Thi Nhung, Niwat Chansiripornchai, Juan J. Carrique-Mas

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health threat, and antimicrobial usage and AMR in animal production is one of its contributing sources. Poultry is one of the most widespread types of meat consumed worldwide. Poultry flocks are often raised under intensive conditions using large amounts of antimicrobials to prevent and to treat disease, as well as for growth promotion. Antimicrobial resistant poultry pathogens may result in treatment failure, leading to economic losses, but also be a source of resistant bacteria/genes (including zoonotic bacteria) that may represent a risk to human health. Here we reviewed data on AMR in 12 poultry pathogens, including avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC), Salmonella Pullorum/Gallinarum, Pasteurella multocida, Avibacterium paragallinarum, Gallibacterium anatis, Ornitobacterium rhinotracheale (ORT), Bordetella avium, Clostridium perfringens, Mycoplasma spp., Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae, and Riemerella anatipestifer. A number of studies have demonstrated increases in resistance over time for S. Pullorum/Gallinarum, M. gallisepticum, and G. anatis. Among Enterobacteriaceae, APEC isolates displayed considerably higher levels of AMR compared with S. Pullorum/Gallinarum, with prevalence of resistance over >80% for ampicillin, amoxicillin, tetracycline across studies. Among the Gram-negative, non-Enterobacteriaceae pathogens, ORT had the highest levels of phenotypic resistance with median levels of AMR against co-trimoxazole, enrofloxacin, gentamicin, amoxicillin, and ceftiofur all exceeding 50%. In contrast, levels of resistance among P. multocida isolates were less than 20% for all antimicrobials. The study highlights considerable disparities in methodologies, as well as in criteria for phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing and result interpretation. It is necessary to increase efforts to harmonize testing practices, and to promote free access to data on AMR in order to improve treatment guidelines as well as to monitor the evolution of AMR in poultry bacterial pathogens.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 732 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 732 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 91 12%
Student > Master 76 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 74 10%
Researcher 73 10%
Student > Postgraduate 30 4%
Other 96 13%
Unknown 292 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 95 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 86 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 66 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 65 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 4%
Other 79 11%
Unknown 315 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,243,065
of 26,413,848 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#272
of 8,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,879
of 333,109 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#3
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,413,848 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,109 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.