Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37950886›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2024

Strategies to reduce antimicrobials in livestock and aquaculture, and their impact under field conditions: a structured scoping literature review.

João Sucena Afonso, Mahmoud El Tholth, K Marie Mcintyre, Luís Pedro Carmo, Lucy Coyne, Diego Manriquez, Didier Raboisson, Guillaume Lhermie, Jonathan Rushton

Open access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2024. 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
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Functional Characterization ofVeterinary sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Livestock Antibiotics Use and Antimicrobial Resistance.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.

João Sucena AfonsoDepartment of Livestock and One Health, Institute of Infection, Veterinary & Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8747-2443
Mahmoud El TholthGlobal Academy of Agriculture and Food Systems, The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
K Marie McintyreModelling, Evidence and Policy group, School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Luís Pedro CarmoNorwegian Veterinary Institute, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7367-5178
Lucy CoyneNational Office of Animal Health, Stevenage, UK.
Diego ManriquezCIRAD, UMR ASTRE, Montpellier, France, ASTRE, CIRAD, INRAE, University of Monpellier, Montpellier, Universite de Toulouse, ENVT, 31300, Toulouse, France.ORCID 0000-0003-0899-2457
Didier RaboissonCIRAD, UMR ASTRE, Montpellier, France, ASTRE, CIRAD, INRAE, University of Monpellier, Montpellier, Universite de Toulouse, ENVT, 31300, Toulouse, France.
Guillaume LhermieCIRAD, UMR ASTRE, Montpellier, France, ASTRE, CIRAD, INRAE, University of Monpellier, Montpellier, Universite de Toulouse, ENVT, 31300, Toulouse, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2538-1586
Jonathan RushtonDepartment of Livestock and One Health, Institute of Infection, Veterinary & Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement · FRUniversity of Liverpool · GBAge UK · GBKafrelsheikh University · EGNewcastle University · GBNorwegian Veterinary Institute · NO

Funding

ROADMAP H2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance is a pandemic problem, causing substantial health and economic burdens. Antimicrobials are extensively used in livestock and aquaculture, exacerbating this global threat. Fostering the prudent use of antimicrobials will safeguard animal and human health. A lack of knowledge about alternatives to replace antimicrobials, and their effectiveness under field conditions, hampers changes in farming practices. This work aimed to understand the impact of strategies to reduce antimicrobial usage (AMU) in livestock and aquaculture, under field conditions, using a structured scoping literature review. The Extension for Scoping Reviews of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA-ScR) were followed and the Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Time and Setting (PICOTS) framework used. Articles were identified from CAB Abstracts, MEDLINE and Scopus. A total of 7505 unique research articles were identified, 926 of which were eligible for full-text assessment; 203 articles were included in data extraction. Given heterogeneity across articles in the way alternatives to antimicrobials or interventions against their usage were described, there was a need to standardize these by grouping them in categories. There were differences in the impacts of the strategies between and within species; this highlights the absence of a 'one-size-fits-all' solution. Nevertheless, some options seem more promising than others, as their impacts were consistently equivalent or positive when compared with animal performance using antimicrobials. This was particularly the case for bioactive protein and peptides, and feed/water management. The outcomes of this work provide data to inform cost-effectiveness assessments of strategies to reduce AMU.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective AgentsLivestockAnimalsAquacultureCitric AcidFarmsHumansAnti-Infective AgentsCitric Acid

Identifiers

PMID37950886
PMCPMC10761277
OpenAlexW4388590872

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.