ReviewEnvironmental geochemistry and health2020
Quantitative study on the fate of antibiotic emissions in China.
Review in Environmental geochemistry and health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Whole genome analysis, fermentation process, and development of plant functional microbial fertilizer for Bacillus velezensis YU18 in mangrove.Antonie van Leeuwenhoek · 2026Article
- Mitigating antimicrobial resistance in the animal industry: reduction strategies and alternatives to antibiotics.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- The microbiome, resistome, and their co-evolution in sewage at a hospital for infectious diseases in Shanghai, China.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Review
- Exposure to antibiotics and mental disorders in children: a community-based cross-sectional study.Environmental geochemistry and health · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
China, the largest producer and user of antibiotics in the world, discharges excessive amounts of these substances into the environment, without prior treatment. This results in ubiquitous distribution of these substances, as well as increased levels of drug-resistant bacteria, that will eventually cause unimaginable consequences to the environment and to humans. However, most of the research on antibiotics has focused on residue analysis of single medium such as wastewater and landfills. There is paucity of research that systematically investigates the fate of antibiotics after excretion, and specifically of end-treatment processes. In this paper, the fate of antibiotic emissions is systematically calculated. The results show that human and livestock feces account for 57.6% and 42.6% of the discharge of medicinal antibiotics and veterinary antibiotics, respectively. Of these feces types, pig feces accounted for 98.7% of antibiotic residues in livestock feces. The above conclusions can be used to clarify the direction of the tracking and supervision of antibiotic residues and provide new ideas for the treatment of antibiotics, especially their terminal removal.
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.