Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27915061›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance2016

Modelling the consequences of targeted selective treatment strategies on performance and emergence of anthelmintic resistance amongst grazing calves.

Zoe Berk, Yan C S M Laurenson, Andrew B Forbes, Ilias Kyriazakis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Evolutionary and epidemiological considerations for anthelmintic treatments in ruminant livestock.International journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. What Modeling Parasites, Transmission, and Resistance Can Teach Us.The Veterinary clinics of North America. Food animal practice · 2020
    Review
  6. Veterinary sciences · 2019
    Article
  7. Prospects for elimination of soil-transmitted helminths.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2017
    Review
  8. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Zoe BerkSchool of Agriculture Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK. Electronic address: z.berk@newcastle.ac.uk.
Yan C S M LaurensonAnimal Science, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, 2351, Australia.
Andrew B ForbesScottish Centre for Production Animal Health and Food Safety, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, G61 1QH, Scotland, UK.
Ilias KyriazakisSchool of Agriculture Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK.
Newcastle University · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of New England · AU

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/K50175X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of anthelmintic resistance by helminths can be slowed by maintaining refugia on pasture or in untreated hosts. Targeted selective treatments (TST) may achieve this through the treatment only of individuals that would benefit most from anthelmintic, according to certain criteria. However TST consequences on cattle are uncertain, mainly due to difficulties of comparison between alternative strategies. We developed a mathematical model to compare: 1) the most 'beneficial' indicator for treatment selection and 2) the method of selection of calves exposed to Ostertagia ostertagi, i.e. treating a fixed percentage of the population with the lowest (or highest) indicator values versus treating individuals who exceed (or are below) a given indicator threshold. The indicators evaluated were average daily gain (ADG), faecal egg counts (FEC), plasma pepsinogen, combined FEC and plasma pepsinogen, versus random selection of individuals. Treatment success was assessed in terms of benefit per R (BPR), the ratio of average benefit in weight gain to change in frequency of resistance alleles R (relative to an untreated population). The optimal indicator in terms of BPR for fixed percentages of calves treated was plasma pepsinogen and the worst ADG; in the latter case treatment was applied to some individuals who were not in need of treatment. The reverse was found when calves were treated according to threshold criteria, with ADG being the best target indicator for treatment. This was also the most beneficial strategy overall, with a significantly higher BPR value than any other strategy, but its degree of success depended on the chosen threshold of the indicator. The study shows strong support for TST, with all strategies showing improvements on calves treated selectively, compared with whole-herd treatment at 3, 8, 13 weeks post-turnout. The developed model appeared capable of assessing the consequences of other TST strategies on calf populations.

Indexed as

Drug ResistanceAnimalsAnthelminticsBody WeightCattleCattle DiseasesModels, TheoreticalOstertagiaOstertagiasisParasite Egg CountTreatment OutcomeAnthelminticsAnthelmintic resistanceCattleGastrointestinal parasitismMathematical modellingOstertagia ostertagiTargeted selective treatment (TST)

Identifiers

PMID27915061
PMCPMC5137182
OpenAlexW2550790872

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.