SynthesisBMJ global health2019
Comparison of different approaches to antibiotic restriction in food-producing animals: stratified results from a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Growth performance, intestinal morphology, and serum biochemistry of European quail (Coturnix coturnix) fed agro-industrial fruit residue extracts as alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Dietary grape pomace mitigates high-NSP-induced inflammation and production loss via microbiome-SCFA-immune mediated pathways.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2026Article
- Natural Microbiota of Dogs and Cats as a Source and Vector of Resistance Genes-Clinical Significance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Government policy interventions to reduce veterinary antimicrobial consumption in production animals: a protocol for a systematic review and evidence map.Systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial use regulations are associated with increased susceptibility among bovineOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Exposure and health risks of livestock air resistomes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Factors associated with clinical antimicrobial resistance in China: a nationwide analysis.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2025Article
- Isolation, characterization and liposome-loaded encapsulation of a novel virulentFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Extended-spectrumFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Understanding Consumers' Purchase Intention Towards Meat Produced Without Preventive Antibiotic Use.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Antibiotic resistance spectrums ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- The effect of a One Health message intervention on willingness to pay for antibiotic-free animal foods: A randomized controlled trial among Chinese college students.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Article
- Intramammary Ethno-Veterinary Formulation in Bovine Mastitis Treatment for Optimization of Antibiotic Use.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- The effect of antibiotic usage on resistance in humans and food-producing animals: a longitudinal, One Health analysis using European data.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Current Insights Regarding the Role of Farm Animals in the Spread of Antimicrobial Resistance from a One Health Perspective.Veterinary sciences · 2022Review
- Quantifying the Relationship between Antibiotic Use in Food-Producing Animals and Antibiotic Resistance in Humans.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Governing Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) in a Changing Climate: A Participatory Scenario Planning Approach Applied to Sweden in 2050.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Antibiotic Resistance in Bacterial Strains Isolated from Sewage of Slaughterhouses Located in Sicily (Italy).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- In silico molecular docking and in vitro antimicrobial efficacy of phytochemicals against multi-drug-resistant enteroaggregative Escherichia coli and non-typhoidal Salmonella spp.Gut pathogens · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe have previously reported, in a systematic review of 181 studies, that restriction of antibiotic use in food-producing animals is associated with a reduction in antibiotic-resistant bacterial isolates. While informative, that report did not concretely specify whether different types of restriction are associated with differential effectiveness in reducing resistance. We undertook a sub-analysis of the systematic review to address this question.
methodsWe created a classification scheme of different approaches to antibiotic restriction: (1) complete restriction; (2) single antibiotic-class restriction; (3) single antibiotic restriction; (4) all non-therapeutic use restriction; (5) growth promoter and prophylaxis restriction; (6) growth promoter restriction and (7) other/undetermined. All studies in the original systematic review that were amenable to meta-analysis were included into this substudy and coded by intervention type. Meta-analyses were conducted using random effects models, stratified by intervention type.
resultsA total of 127 studies were included. The most frequently studied intervention type was complete restriction (n=51), followed by restriction of non-therapeutic (n=33) and growth promoter (n=19) indications. None examined growth promoter and prophylaxis restrictions together. Three and seven studies examined single antibiotic-class and single antibiotic restrictions, respectively; these two intervention types were not significantly associated with reductions in antibiotic resistance. Though complete restrictions were associated with a 15% reduction in antibiotic resistance, less prohibitive approaches also demonstrated reduction in antibiotic resistance of 9%-30%.
conclusionBroad interventions that restrict global antibiotic use appear to be more effective in reducing antibiotic resistance compared with restrictions that narrowly target one specific antibiotic or antibiotic class. Importantly, interventions that allow for therapeutic antibiotic use appear similarly effective compared with those that restrict all uses of antibiotics, suggesting that complete bans are not necessary. These findings directly inform the creation of specific policies to restrict antibiotic use in food-producing animals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.