Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37235449›Full record

ArticleVeterinary sciences2023

Antimicrobial Use in Canadian Cow-Calf Herds.

Jayce D Fossen, John R Campbell, Sheryl P Gow, Nathan Erickson, Cheryl L Waldner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Survey of antimicrobial prescribing practices across western Canadian beef cow-calf veterinarians.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2025
    Article
  9. Genomic Characterization ofMicroorganisms · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Antimicrobial resistance in genericThe Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Producer attitudes regarding antimicrobial use and resistance in Canadian cow-calf herds.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jayce D FossenDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3461-8736
John R CampbellDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
Sheryl P GowPublic Health Agency of Canada, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
Nathan EricksonDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
Cheryl L WaldnerDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
University of Saskatchewan · CAPublic Health Agency of Canada · CA

Funding

Beef Cattle Research Council Not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite growing concern surrounding antimicrobial use (AMU) and the importance of cow-calf herds to the Canadian livestock industry, surveillance of AMU in cow-calf herds to inform antimicrobial stewardship programs has been sporadic. Producers from the Canadian Cow-Calf Surveillance Network (87%, 146/168) provided data and almost all reported AMU in at least one animal (99%, 145/146 herds) in 2019-2020. The most common reasons for AMU were treatment of respiratory disease in nursing calves in 78% of herds and neonatal diarrhea in 67% of herds, as well as for lameness in cows in 83% of herds. However, most herds treated <5% of animals for these reasons. Less than 2.5% of herds treated more than 30% of calves for either bovine respiratory disease or neonatal diarrhea and no herds treated more than 30% of cows for lameness. The most frequently reported antimicrobial was oxytetracycline in 81% of herds, followed by florfenicol in 73% of herds. Antimicrobials with very high importance to human health, such as ceftiofur, were used at least once by 20% of herds but were only used in >30% of nursing calves from one herd. Similarly, while 56% of herds used macrolides at least once, within-herd use was the highest in nursing calves where <4% of herds reported use in >30% of animals. Herds using artificial insemination and calving in the winter were more likely (

Indexed as

antimicrobial resistance (AMR)antimicrobial use (AMU)beef cattlecow–calf

Identifiers

PMID37235449
PMCPMC10223781
OpenAlexW4377241057

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.