ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Meat Consumers' Opinion Regarding Unhealthy Pigs: Should They Be Treated with Antibiotics or Euthanized on Farm?
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consumers' perspectives on antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance in food animals: a systematic review.NPJ science of food · 2025Article
- Influences on the Decision to Euthanize a Compromised Pig.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Landscape review about the decision to euthanize a compromised pig.Porcine health management · 2024Review
- Exploring Consumer Behavior and Preferences in Welfare-Friendly Pork Breeding: A Multivariate Analysis.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Invited review: strategic adoption of antibiotic-free pork production: the importance of a holistic approach.Translational animal science · 2022Review
- Exploring Farmers' Reasons for Antibiotic Use and Misuse in Pig Farms in Brazil.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the opinions of meat consumers (n = 1780) on on-farm management of unhealthy pigs, whether support for treatment with antibiotics varies according with chance of recovery, and the effect of knowledge on the use of antibiotics on these opinions. Most participants believed that the use of antibiotics was the best solution for unhealthy pigs, and this was associated with a low level of knowledge about antibiotics. Increasing the probability of recovery after treatment increased support for treating pigs with antibiotics. However, the majority of participants rejected the consumption of meat from animals housed in "hospital pens". After price, concern with food safety was the second main factor that influenced participants' choice when buying meat. Support for the use of antibiotics to deal with unhealthy pigs in "hospital pens", as well as for consumption of the meat from these animals, was higher among participants involved in agriculture. This shows that consumers are unaware of the potential negative repercussions for animal welfare associated with banning or reducing the use of antibiotics in livestock production, which is an important concern for the industry.
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.