Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28830074›Full record

SynthesisPathogens and disease2017

Do antimicrobial mass medications work? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials investigating antimicrobial prophylaxis or metaphylaxis against naturally occurring bovine respiratory disease.

Keith Edward Baptiste, Niels Christian Kyvsgaard

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pathogens and disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Antimicrobial use in animal farms in Egypt: rates, patterns, and determinants.The Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. MinisculeSustainable microbiology · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Keith Edward BaptisteDanish Medicines Agency, Axel Heides Gade 1, DK-2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark.
Niels Christian KyvsgaardDanish Medicines Agency, Axel Heides Gade 1, DK-2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark.
Danish Medicines Agency · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A distinct difference between veterinary and human medicine is the routine use of antimicrobial mass medications (prophylaxis, metaphylaxis) to healthy individuals. The need for antimicrobial mass medications is based on beliefs that group/s of animals will contract a bacterial disease (i.e. morbidity) and/or die (i.e. mortality). Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) represents the major indication for cattle antimicrobials worldwide. The objectives were to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) for naturally occurring BRD investigating antimicrobial prophylaxis/metaphylaxis to prevent morbidity/mortality. In total, 58 publications met the inclusion criteria summarizing 169 individual RCTs, spanning 50 years (1966-2016). Antimicrobial prophylaxis and metaphylaxis demonstrated moderate, yet highly variable relative risk reductions in BRD morbidity. These were dependent on the antimicrobial classes used, dependent on metaphylaxis definition, BRD attack rates and duration of the RCTs. Best relative risk reductions were from broad-spectrum critically important antimicrobials, or combinations. BRD prophylaxis/metaphylaxis represents major antimicrobial consumption for highly variable short-term gains in absolute risk reduction of morbidity/mortality. Despite widespread use of prevention products, the need for antimicrobial mass medications should be re-evaluated since the underlying problem is more likely the segmented infrastructure of the feedlot and veal calf industries compared to the disease itself.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsBovine Respiratory Disease ComplexCattleDisease OutbreaksPrimary PreventionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsStress, PhysiologicalSurvival AnalysisAnti-Infective Agentsantimicrobialbovinemetaphylaxisprophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID28830074
PMCPMC7108556
OpenAlexW2738151066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.