Pan-European monitoring of susceptibility to human-use antimicrobial agents in enteric bacteria isolated from healthy food-producing animals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the antimicrobial susceptibility of Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter and Enterococcus from cattle, pigs and chickens across the European Union (EU) using uniform methodology. METHODS: Intestinal samples (1624) were taken at slaughter across five EU countries. Bacteria were isolated in national laboratories, whilst MICs were determined in a central laboratory for key antimicrobials used in human medicine. Clinical resistance was based on CLSI breakpoints and decreased susceptibility based on European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)/EUCAST epidemiological cut-off values. RESULTS: Isolation rates were high for E. coli (n=1540), low for Salmonella (n=201) and intermediate for Campylobacter (n=940) and Enterococcus (n=786). For E. coli and Salmonella, clinical resistance to newer compounds (cefepime, cefotaxime and ciprofloxacin) was absent or low, but decreased susceptibility was apparent, particularly in chicken strains. Resistance to older compounds (except gentamicin) was variable and higher. Colistin resistance was absent for E. coli, but apparent for Salmonella. For Campylobacter jejuni, ciprofloxacin resistance was markedly prevalent for chickens, whereas clinical resistance and decreased susceptibility to erythromycin was absent or very low. For Campylobacter coli, resistance was notably higher. None of the Enterococcus faecium strains was resistant to linezolid, but some were resistant to ampicillin or vancomycin. Resistance to quinupristin/dalfopristin was frequent. CONCLUSIONS: Resistance patterns varied widely depending on bacterial species, antibiotics, hosts and region. Resistance varied among countries, particularly for older antimicrobials, but clinical resistance to newer antibiotics used to treat foodborne disease in humans was generally very low. In the absence of resistance to newer compounds in E. coli and Salmonella, the apparent decreased susceptibility should be monitored.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".