Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36277087›Full record

ArticleOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2022

Innovations in the veterinary intestinal health field: A patent landscape analysis.

Marga E M Janse, Dick B Zinkweg, Olaf F A Larsen, Linda van de Burgwal

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marga E M JanseVU Amsterdam, Athena Institute, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Dick B ZinkwegVU Amsterdam, Athena Institute, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Olaf F A LarsenVU Amsterdam, Athena Institute, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Linda van de BurgwalVU Amsterdam, Athena Institute, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years it has become evident that a healthy intestinal microbiome is beneficial for the overall health of an individual. A healthy microbiome is diverse, increasing stability and resilience and strengthening the immune system. In addition, healthy intestinal metabolisms have a beneficial effect on many physiological processes such as the brain function. Looking from the One Health perspective, which recognizes that health of humans is closely connected to the health of animals and environment, it is inherently beneficial to stimulate the health of animals for the well-being of humans. However, the intensive administration of antibiotics to livestock for prevention and cure of disease, and even stimulation of growth, disrupts a healthy microbiome. With the rapid increase of emerging zoonotic diseases, alternatives to the use of antimicrobial compounds are urgently necessary. This research analyses the development of alternatives for antibiotic use contributing to veterinary intestinal health through an in-depth patent analysis of inventions for fodder additives. In the period 1999-2020, 1269 unique patent families describing the use of probiotics, enzymes and prebiotics for swine, poultry and ruminants were identified. Innovation trends, geography, key applicants, and classification of patents were analysed. Asian industrial applicants applied for the majority of patents comprising the largest share of patents for probiotics and enzymes in combination with fodder for swine. Followed by North American and European industrial applications, applying for patents for probiotics in combination with fodder for poultry, swine, and ruminants. Overall, our results do not show a clear increase in innovations, suggesting that innovations in the use of probiotics and enzymes in animal feed appear to be stalling. While in the near future a combination of the use of antibiotics and alternatives is most likely to be implemented, the use of probiotics stands a good chance of replacing antibiotics in animal husbandry and limiting the adverse effects of antibiotic abuse.

Indexed as

Antibiotic useEnzymesOne healthPrebioticsProbioticsVeterinary intestinal health

Identifiers

PMID36277087
PMCPMC9582549
OpenAlexW4286776275

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.