Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33835557›Full record

ArticleThe Veterinary record2021

Backyard poultry cases in UK small animal practices: Demographics, health conditions and pharmaceutical prescriptions.

David A Singleton, Christopher Ball, Cameron Rennie, Charlotte Coxon, Kannan Ganapathy, Phil H Jones, David Welchman, John S P Tulloch

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Veterinary record, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

David A SingletonInfection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Cheshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1980-5410
Christopher BallInfection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Cheshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8525-8382
Cameron RennieInfection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Cheshire, UK.
Charlotte CoxonInternational Disease Monitoring and Risk Assessment (EU Exit), Animal and Plant Health Agency, Addlestone, UK.
Kannan GanapathyInfection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Cheshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9401-3560
Phil H JonesSurveillance Intelligence Unit, Animal and Plant Health Agency, Addlestone, UK.
David WelchmanSurveillance Intelligence Unit, Animal and Plant Health Agency, Winchester, UK.
John S P TullochInfection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Cheshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2150-0090
University of Liverpool · GBAnimal and Plant Health Agency · GB

Funding

Animal and Plant Health AgencyBBSRC
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBackyard poultry ownership is of keen interest in the United Kingdom. However, despite this, little is known about veterinary care engagement and outcomes of visits in this group of species.

methodsThis study described and characterised veterinary practice-visiting backyard poultry, utilising electronic health record data supplied by veterinary practices voluntarily participating in the Small Animal Veterinary Surveillance Network between 1st April 2014 and 31st March 2019.

resultsIn total, 4424 recorded poultry consultations originating from 197 veterinary practices (352 sites) were summarised. Chicken consultation (n = 3740) peak incidence was in early summer (April-June), relative to all recorded species. More chickens resided in rural (incident rate ratio = 2.5, confidence interval [CI] 2.3-2.6, p <0.001) or less deprived areas. Non-specific clinical signs were commonly recorded (17.6% of chicken consultations, CI 15.9-19.2), as were those indicative of advanced disease. This latter finding was reflected in prescribed management strategies, with euthanasia comprising 29.8% (CI 27.0-32.6) of consultations. Antimicrobials were commonly prescribed (33.0% of consultations, CI 29.8-36.2), 43.8% of which included antimicrobials considered 'highest priority critically important' by the World Health Organisation.

conclusionOur findings indicate a need to tailor antimicrobial prescription guidance to the backyard poultry setting. In addition, late presentation of disease, vague clinical descriptions in clinical narratives and high euthanasia rates show that disease identification, management and knowledge of poultry health and welfare among owners and veterinary surgeons can be improved.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsChickensDemographyEuthanasia, AnimalHumansOwnershipPoultry DiseasesPrescriptionsUnited KingdomVeterinary MedicineAnti-Infective Agents

Identifiers

PMID33835557
PMCPMC8638672
OpenAlexW3127536289

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.