Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37893994›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

Antimicrobial Use in On-Farm Hatching Systems vs. Traditional Hatching Systems: A Case Study.

Julia G Jerab, Ilias Chantziaras, Tommy Van Limbergen, Johan Van Erum, Filip Boel, Erik Hoeven, Jeroen Dewulf

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Julia G JerabVeterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.
Ilias ChantziarasVeterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.
Tommy Van LimbergenPehestat BV, Dwarsstraat 5, 3560 Lummen, Belgium.
Johan Van ErumPehestat BV, Dwarsstraat 5, 3560 Lummen, Belgium.
Filip BoelBelgabroed, Steenweg op Hoogstraten 141, 2330 Merksplas, Belgium.
Erik HoevenHFHC NV, Nerm 94, 3320 Hoegaarden, Belgium.
Jeroen DewulfVeterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9843-5990
Ghent University · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

On-farm hatching is a relatively new method in the broiler industry, in which fertilized broiler eggs are transported to the farms at the stage of 17-19 days of incubation. Once hatched, the broiler chicks have direct access to feed and water. Previous studies have shown on-farm hatching to increase animal welfare and intestinal development. However, no studies have yet aimed to quantify and compare the antimicrobial use in on-farm hatched flocks with that of traditionally hatched flocks. In this study, information on antimicrobial use (AMU) was collected from 211 Belgian conventional broiler farms, including data from 2244 traditionally hatched flocks and 227 on-farm (NestBorn) hatched flocks. On-farm hatched flocks had significantly (

Indexed as

antimicrobialbroileron-farm hatching

Identifiers

PMID37893994
PMCPMC10603674
OpenAlexW4387782568

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.