Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29932044›Full record

ReviewMicrobiology spectrum2018

Optimization of Antimicrobial Treatment to Minimize Resistance Selection.

Luca Guardabassi, Mike Apley, John Elmerdahl Olsen, Pierre-Louis Toutain, Scott Weese

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microbiology spectrum, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Use of Subtherapeutic Tylvalosin AgainstTransboundary and emerging diseases · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Luca GuardabassiDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark.
Mike ApleyKansas State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Manhattan, Kansas, 66506.
John Elmerdahl OlsenDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark.
Pierre-Louis ToutainINTHERES, Université de Toulouse, INRA, ENVT, Toulouse, France.
Scott WeeseDepartment of Pathobiology, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optimization of antimicrobial treatment is a cornerstone in the fight against antimicrobial resistance. Various national and international authorities and professional veterinary and farming associations have released generic guidelines on prudent antimicrobial use in animals. However, these generic guidelines need to be translated into a set of animal species- and disease-specific practice recommendations. This article focuses on prevention of antimicrobial resistance and its complex relationship with treatment efficacy, highlighting key situations where the current antimicrobial drug products, treatment recommendations, and practices may be insufficient to minimize antimicrobial selection. The authors address this topic using a multidisciplinary approach involving microbiology, pharmacology, clinical medicine, and animal husbandry. In the first part of the article, we define four key targets for implementing the concept of optimal antimicrobial treatment in veterinary practice: (i) reduction of overall antimicrobial consumption, (ii) improved use of diagnostic testing, (iii) prudent use of second-line, critically important antimicrobials, and (iv) optimization of dosage regimens. In the second part, we provided practice recommendations for achieving these four targets, with reference to specific conditions that account for most antimicrobial use in pigs (intestinal and respiratory disease), cattle (respiratory disease and mastitis), dogs and cats (skin, intestinal, genitourinary, and respiratory disease), and horses (upper respiratory disease, neonatal foal care, and surgical infections). Lastly, we present perspectives on the education and research needs for improving antimicrobial use in the future.

Indexed as

Animal DiseasesAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsBacterial InfectionsCatsCattleDogsDrug Resistance, BacterialFemaleHorsesSwineAnti-Infective Agents

Identifiers

PMID29932044
PMCPMC11633575

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.