Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38379999›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Transdisciplinary approaches to addressing factors that influence antimicrobial use in dairy cattle: A scoping review.

Jennifer Cole, Amtul Noor Mughal, Mahmoud Eltholth, Abin Thomas, Mark Holmes

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Jennifer ColeDepartment of Health Studies, School of Life Sciences and the Environment, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, United Kingdom.
Amtul Noor MughalDepartment of Health Studies, School of Life Sciences and the Environment, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, United Kingdom.
Mahmoud EltholthDepartment of Health Studies, School of Life Sciences and the Environment, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, United Kingdom.
Abin ThomasGlobal Academy of Agriculture and Food Security, The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies and the Roslin Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Mark HolmesDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interest in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) associated with livestock farming is increasing. During the 1990s, 30-40 academic papers a year on the use of antibiotics in dairy farming were indexed on the scientific database PubMed, but this has grown to more than 200 a year in the 2020s. Most (85%) of these papers are published in veterinary or livestock science journals. There has been a corresponding increase in social science interest in why responsible antibiotic stewardship in the livestock sector is so challenging. However, most social science insights are published in journals specific to the lead authors' field(s), missing opportunities for knowledge translation to veterinary and animal science. This threatens to inhibit the transdisciplinary One Health approaches required to tackle the problem. Between 1 June and 31 December 2021, we undertook a scoping review of papers on the use of antibiotics in dairy farming indexed in PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Our aim was to identify studies that incorporate social science approaches and methodologies, and to note the main field of the journal in which these studies are published. Papers were most likely to be published in veterinary science, dairy science and/or livestock science journals (61, 29 and 18 respectively out of 127 papers) and were most likely to be concerned with antibiotic use, prescribing practice, and/or diagnosis (94%, 39% and 33% of included papers respectively). Only 27% of papers meeting our inclusion criteria included a qualitative approach to understanding reasons for antibiotic use. Even fewer acknowledged underlying drivers of behaviour, whereas such reasons are frequently highlighted in social science literature. Thus, to address the global health threat from antibiotic resistance, more work is needed to bring together the disparate but equally valid disciplines, methodologies and researchers working on antibiotic use in the livestock sector.

Identifiers

PMID38379999
PMCPMC10877173

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.