Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36287975›Full record

SynthesisToxins2022

The Efficacy of Additives for the Mitigation of Aflatoxins in Animal Feed: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Oluwatobi Kolawole, Wipada Siri-Anusornsak, Awanwee Petchkongkaw, Julie Meneely, Christopher Elliott

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Toxins, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

5 authors.

Oluwatobi KolawoleInstitute for Global Food Security, National Measurement Laboratory: Centre of Excellence in Agriculture and Food Integrity, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast BT9 5DL, UK.
Wipada Siri-AnusornsakDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Faculty of Agro-Industry, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4061-7454
Awanwee PetchkongkawInstitute for Global Food Security, National Measurement Laboratory: Centre of Excellence in Agriculture and Food Integrity, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast BT9 5DL, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5738-2191
Julie MeneelyInstitute for Global Food Security, National Measurement Laboratory: Centre of Excellence in Agriculture and Food Integrity, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast BT9 5DL, UK.
Christopher ElliottInstitute for Global Food Security, National Measurement Laboratory: Centre of Excellence in Agriculture and Food Integrity, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast BT9 5DL, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0495-2909

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The contamination of animal feed with aflatoxins is an ongoing and growing serious issue, particularly for livestock farmers in tropical and subtropical regions. Exposure of animals to an aflatoxin-contaminated diet impairs feed efficiency and increases susceptibility to diseases, resulting in mortality, feed waste, and increased production costs. They can also be excreted in milk and thus pose a significant human health risk. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aim to compare and identify the most effective intervention to alleviate the negative impact of aflatoxins on the important livestock sector, poultry production. Eligible studies on the efficacy of feed additives to mitigate the toxic effect of aflatoxins in poultry were retrieved from different databases. Additives were classified into three categories based on their mode of action and composition: organic binder, inorganic binder, and antioxidant. Moreover, alanine transaminase (ALT), a liver enzyme, was the primary indicator. Supplementing aflatoxin-contaminated feeds with different categories of additives significantly reduces serum ALT levels (p < 0.001) compared with birds fed only a contaminated diet. Inorganic binder (P-score 0.8615) was ranked to be the most efficient in terms of counteracting the toxic effect of aflatoxins, followed by antioxidant (P-score 0.6159) and organic binder (P-score 0.5018). These findings will have significant importance for farmers, veterinarians, and animal nutrition companies when deciding which type of additives to use for mitigating exposure to aflatoxins, thus improving food security and the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in developing countries.

Indexed as

AflatoxinsAlanine TransaminaseAnimal FeedAnimalsAntioxidantsFood ContaminationHumansPoultryAflatoxinsAlanine TransaminaseAntioxidantsadditivesaflatoxinsantioxidantbindersclay mineralslivestockmitigationnetwork meta-analysisyeast cell wall

Identifiers

PMID36287975
PMCPMC9607122

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.