ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
What Matters in Piglets' Exposure to Antibiotics Administered through Drinking Water?
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Cutoff Values for Doxycycline in Pigs to Support the Establishment of Clinical Breakpoints for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing.Journal of veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Pooled it
- Predicted PK/PD inadequacy of amoxicillin delivered in drinking water against respiratory pathogens in post-weaning piglets: can time-restricted dosing improve animals' exposure and potential treatment efficacy?Veterinary and animal science · 2026Article
- Delivery strategies to improve piglets exposure to oral antimicrobials.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
- Qualitative risk assessment of homogeneity, stability, and residual concentrations of antimicrobials in medicated feed and drinking water in pig rearing.BMC veterinary research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A number of drugs are given in drinking water in piglet farming, although this way of administering drugs leads to significant and uncontrolled variability in exposures. Three main explanations for this variability have been described in the literature: (1) the drinking behavior of animals, (2) the drug concentration in water, and (3) the inter-individual variability in the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters. This article assesses the relative importance of these three sources of exposure variability for doxycycline and amoxicillin using pharmacokinetic simulations and by observing watering behavior, and analyzes the consequences of this exposure variability. The water consumption behavior was by far the most important factor as it led to a variation in exposures of up to a factor of 7 between piglets. The second most influential factor was the drug concentration in the drinking water with variations ranging from -43.3% to +48.7% at the beginning and the end of the pipeline. Finally, the between-individual variation in PK parameters depends on the drug, but had a low impact on exposure variability. In the most variable case (doxycycline), the mean ratio between the 10% less exposed and the 10% most exposed piglets varied from 3.7 without PK parameters variability to 6 with PK variability. For both drugs, this study also showed that only a small percentage of the piglets (36%) could be considered as well exposed in case of infection by
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.