Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31978098›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Towards a bottom-up understanding of antimicrobial use and resistance on the farm: A knowledge, attitudes, and practices survey across livestock systems in five African countries.

Mark A Caudell, Alejandro Dorado-Garcia, Suzanne Eckford, Chris Creese, Denis K Byarugaba, Kofi Afakye, Tamara Chansa-Kabali, Folorunso O Fasina, Emmanuel Kabali, Stella Kiambi and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 123 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
123citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.3field-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

123 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 187 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

63 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

20 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Mark A CaudellFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0003-4456-3318
Alejandro Dorado-GarciaFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
Suzanne EckfordFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
Chris CreeseFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
Denis K ByarugabaCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0002-4175-5659
Kofi AfakyeFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Accra, Ghana.
Tamara Chansa-KabaliDepartment of Psychology, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Folorunso O FasinaFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.ORCID 0000-0003-3088-8752
Emmanuel KabaliFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Stella KiambiFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Nairobi, Kenya.
Tabitha KimaniFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Nairobi, Kenya.
Geoffrey MaindaDepartment of Veterinary Services, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, Lusaka, Zambia.
Peter E MangeshoNational Institute for Medical Research, Amani Medical Research Centre, Muheza, Tanzania.
Francis ChimpanguFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Lusaka, Zambia.
Kululeko DubeFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Bashiru Boi KikimotoPublic Health & Food Safety Unit, Veterinary Service, Accra, Ghana.
Eric KokaDepartment of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana.
Tendai MugaraFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Bachana RubegwaFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Samuel SwiswaDivision of Veterinary Services, Department of Livestock and Veterinary Services, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations · ITWorld Health Organization - Zimbabwe · ZWMakerere University · UGMinistry of Agriculture and Livestock · ZMNational Institute for Medical Research · TZUniversity of Cape Coast · GHUniversity of Zambia · ZMWorld Health Organization - Zambia · ZM

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nutritional and economic potentials of livestock systems are compromised by the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance. A major driver of resistance is the misuse and abuse of antimicrobial drugs. The likelihood of misuse may be elevated in low- and middle-income countries where limited professional veterinary services and inadequately controlled access to drugs are assumed to promote non-prudent practices (e.g., self-administration of drugs). The extent of these practices, as well as the knowledge and attitudes motivating them, are largely unknown within most agricultural communities in low- and middle-income countries. The main objective of this study was to document dimensions of knowledge, attitudes and practices related to antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance in livestock systems and identify the livelihood factors associated with these dimensions. A mixed-methods ethnographic approach was used to survey households keeping layers in Ghana (N = 110) and Kenya (N = 76), pastoralists keeping cattle, sheep, and goats in Tanzania (N = 195), and broiler farmers in Zambia (N = 198), and Zimbabwe (N = 298). Across countries, we find that it is individuals who live or work at the farm who draw upon their knowledge and experiences to make decisions regarding antimicrobial use and related practices. Input from animal health professionals is rare and antimicrobials are sourced at local, privately owned agrovet drug shops. We also find that knowledge, attitudes, and particularly practices significantly varied across countries, with poultry farmers holding more knowledge, desirable attitudes, and prudent practices compared to pastoralist households. Multivariate models showed that variation in knowledge, attitudes and practices is related to several factors, including gender, disease dynamics on the farm, and source of animal health information. Study results emphasize that interventions to limit antimicrobial resistance should be founded upon a bottom-up understanding of antimicrobial use at the farm-level given limited input from animal health professionals and under-resourced regulatory capacities within most low- and middle-income countries. Establishing this bottom-up understanding across cultures and production systems will inform the development and implementation of the behavioral change interventions to combat antimicrobial resistance globally.

Indexed as

FarmsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAnimal HusbandryAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCattleChickensFarmersGhanaHumansKenyaLivestockSheepSurveys and QuestionnairesTanzaniaZambiaAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID31978098
PMCPMC6980545
OpenAlexW3001123844

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.