Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36823483›Full record

SynthesisVeterinary research communications2023

Knowledge and practice of antimicrobial usage and resistance among poultry farmers: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.

Abdullah Al Sattar, Nurun Nahar Chisty, Nusrat Irin, Md Helal Uddin, F M Yasir Hasib, Md Ahasanul Hoque

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Veterinary research communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Patterns of multidrug resistance inJournal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. AI-Prediction ofHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Multidrug Resistance and Virulence Gene Profiles ofVeterinary medicine international · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance inOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

6 authors.

Abdullah Al SattarDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Zakir Hossain Road, Khulshi, Chattogram, 4225, Bangladesh.
Nurun Nahar ChistyDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Zakir Hossain Road, Khulshi, Chattogram, 4225, Bangladesh.
Nusrat IrinDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Zakir Hossain Road, Khulshi, Chattogram, 4225, Bangladesh.
Md Helal UddinDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Zakir Hossain Road, Khulshi, Chattogram, 4225, Bangladesh.
F M Yasir HasibDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Public Health, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong.
Md Ahasanul HoqueDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Zakir Hossain Road, Khulshi, Chattogram, 4225, Bangladesh. md.hoque@my.jcu.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A systematic review was conducted to summarize and synthesize the existing research on poultry farmers' knowledge, practices, and awareness regarding antimicrobial use (AMU) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). It was undertaken by systematically searching databases, screening and characterizing relevant studies, extracting data, and evaluating the risk of bias. The outcomes were stratified into several subgroups, and pooled prevalence of each subgroup was calculated using a random-effect meta-analysis. Meta-regression was used for selected outcomes to further investigate the potential sources of heterogeneity across studies. Poultry farmers had knowledge and practice gaps on antimicrobial use. While most (65%; 95% CI: 50%-80%) used antimicrobials on poultry for therapeutic purposes, a portion used them to prevent disease (45%; 95% CI: 34%-55%) or boost growth (29%; 95% CI: 13%-46%) and productivity (20%; 95% CI: 6%-34%). 60% (95% CI: 50%-69%) of farmers approached veterinarians for antimicrobial advice, although many consulted drug sellers and fellow farmers. Insufficient antimicrobial residue knowledge (45%; 95% CI: 29%-62%), as well as inadequate awareness and faulty practice on withdrawal periods, were identified. Only 43% (95% CI: 34%-53%) were knowledgeable about AMR. Around half of farmers understood AMR's impacts on poultry, human health, and the environment. Meta-regression demonstrated that the source of heterogeneity for therapeutic antimicrobial use was the type of poultry farmers sampled and their educational qualifications; geographical region was significantly associated with antimicrobial usage based on farmers' experience; and the country's economic state was correlated with farmers' understanding of antimicrobial residue. This study recommends implementing legislation for judicious antimicrobial use, and farmer awareness campaigns to reinforce knowledge about prudent AMU and AMR.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective AgentsAnimalsFarmersHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansPoultryAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective AgentsAMRAntimicrobial useKnowledgeMeta-analysisPoultry farmerPractice

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.