Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25861382›Full record

ReviewEvolutionary applications2015

Antibiotics in agriculture and the risk to human health: how worried should we be?

Qiuzhi Chang, Weike Wang, Gili Regev-Yochay, Marc Lipsitch, William P Hanage

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evolutionary applications, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 192 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
192citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
22.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

192 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 558 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. A One Health Perspective onMicroorganisms · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

132 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Qiuzhi ChangDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA, USA.
Weike WangDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA, USA.
Gili Regev-YochayInfectious Disease Unit, Sheba Medical Center Ramat-Gan, Israel ; The Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University Tel-Aviv, Israel.
Marc LipsitchDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA, USA.
William P HanageDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA, USA.
Harvard University · USTel Aviv University · IL

Funding

Understanding and controlling antibiotic resistanceU54GM088558 · NIGMS · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI HANAGE, WILLIAM · 2009 to 2018
$26.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM088558
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of antibiotics in agriculture is routinely described as a major contributor to the clinical problem of resistant disease in human medicine. While a link is plausible, there are no data conclusively showing the magnitude of the threat emerging from agriculture. Here, we define the potential mechanisms by which agricultural antibiotic use could lead to human disease and use case studies to critically assess the potential risk from each. The three mechanisms considered are as follows 1: direct infection with resistant bacteria from an animal source, 2: breaches in the species barrier followed by sustained transmission in humans of resistant strains arising in livestock, and 3: transfer of resistance genes from agriculture into human pathogens. Of these, mechanism 1 is the most readily estimated, while significant is small in comparison with the overall burden of resistant disease. Several cases of mechanism 2 are known, and we discuss the likely livestock origins of resistant clones of Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecium, but while it is easy to show relatedness the direction of transmission is hard to assess in robust fashion. More difficult yet to study is the contribution of mechanism 3, which may be the most important of all.

Indexed as

agricultureantibiotic resistanceEnterococcusfoodresistance transferStaphylococcus aureus

Identifiers

PMID25861382
PMCPMC4380918
OpenAlexW2132993428

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.