ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2021
Comparison of different antimicrobial use indicators and antimicrobial resistance data in food-producing animals.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Flattening Patterns of Antimicrobial Resistance Levels in Indicator E. coli in Dutch Livestock.Zoonoses and public health · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial Consumption and Utilisation in Zambia: Results from the Analysis of National Data for the Human and Animal Health Sectors.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial use in animals: When more might be better.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2025Article
- Exploring antibiotic stewardship interventions within a One Health context: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Quantification of Antimicrobial Use on Commercial Broiler Farms in Pakistan.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- An Evaluation of the Impact of an OPEN Stewardship Generated Feedback Intervention on Antibiotic Prescribing among Primary Care Veterinarians in Canada and Israel.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Comparing human and animal antimicrobial usage: a critical appraisal of the indicators used is needed.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2024Review
- Barriers and facilitators to implementing a new regulation restricting antimicrobial use in dairy production in Québec, Canada: A qualitative study.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Current Insights Regarding the Role of Farm Animals in the Spread of Antimicrobial Resistance from a One Health Perspective.Veterinary sciences · 2022Review
- National Monitoring of Veterinary-Dispensed Antimicrobials for Use on Pig Farms in Austria: 2015-2020.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore the effects of using different indicators to quantify antimicrobial usage (AMU) in livestock and compare outcomes with antimicrobial resistance (AMR) data.
methodsThree indicators were used to quantify AMU, two indicators in which the denominator varied: defined daily doses per average mass of the animals present per year (DDD/AY) and defined daily doses per population correction unit (DDD/PCU) and one in which the numerator varied: milligrams of active ingredient per PCU (mg/PCU). AMU was compared with antimicrobial resistance data from the national monitoring programme from 2013 to 2018 with the proportion of
resultsThe ranking of livestock sectors differs between sectors when using different indicators to express AMU. Dairy cattle rank lowest when expressing AMU in DDD/AY, followed by pigs and broilers corresponding to the rankings of the sectors for AMR. When changing the denominator to PCU, the ranking in AMU is reversed: use ranks highest in dairy cattle and lowest broilers.
conclusionsUsing different denominators in AMU indicators has a major impact on measured use. This might result in misinterpretation of effects of interventions on AMU and the associations of AMU with AMR across animal sectors. From an epidemiological perspective, indicators that take into account time at risk of exposure to antimicrobials are to be preferred and reflect the AMR risk most accurately.
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.