MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<i>In vitro</i> evaluation of topical biocide and antimicrobial susceptibility of <i>Staphylococcus pseudintermedius</i> from dogs

2012· article· en· W1910287674 on OpenAlexaff
Becky Valentine, Walter Dew, Anthony Yu, J. Scott Weese

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Dermatology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaphylococcus pseudintermediusMicrobiologyMupirocinAntimicrobialFusidic acidBacitracinTriclosanMinimum inhibitory concentrationBiocideBiologyAntibioticsMedicineStaphylococcus aureusStaphylococcusBacteriaMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus pseudintermedius is an important canine pathogen, and the emergence and widespread dissemination of meticillin-resistant strains (MRSP) is of significant concern. Multidrug-resistant infections may require alternative approaches, such as the use of topical therapy. There is minimal information about the in vitro susceptibility of meticillin-susceptible S. pseudintermedius (MSSP) and MRSP to biocides and topical antimicrobials. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: The hypothesis was that clinical isolates of MSSP and MRSP would not have universal susceptibility to topical biocides and antimicrobials. The goal of this study was to assess the susceptibility of a collection of S. pseudintermedius isolates to selected antimicrobials and biocides. ANIMALS: The study was performed on clinical isolates of MSSP and MRSP from dogs with skin and soft tissue infections collected throughout North America between 2006 and 2008. METHODS: The minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of chlorhexidine digluconate, benzalkonium chloride, triclosan, accelerated hydrogen peroxide, geranium oil, tea tree oil and grapefruit seed extract were tested for 25 MRSP and 25 MSSP isolates from dogs using the agar dilution method. The MICs of fusidic acid, bacitracin and mupirocin were determined using Etests. RESULTS: Triclosan demonstrated excellent activity against all bacterial isolates, with no growth at the lowest concentration evaluated (MIC ≤ 0.5 μg/mL). Conversely, grapefruit seed extract did not inhibit growth at the highest concentration tested (MIC > 3.84 μg/mL). All isolates were susceptible to mupirocin, fusidic acid and bacitracin. There were no significant differences noted in the range, MIC(50) or MIC(90) between MSSP and MRSP isolates. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: While isolates were susceptible to most of the tested compounds, universal susceptibility to all compounds with potential antimicrobial activity cannot be assumed, and specific testing is required.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary DermatologySame topicAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusFrench-language works237,207