Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38685989›Full record

ArticleTranslational animal science2024

Concerns about the use of antimicrobials in swine herds and alternative trends.

Luciana L Rigueira, Simone Perecmanis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational animal science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Luciana L RigueiraDepartment of Animal Health, Brasília University, 70910-900, Brasília, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3513-2981
Simone PerecmanisDepartment of Animal Health, Brasília University, 70910-900, Brasília, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0929-5859

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pig productivity in Brazil has advanced a lot in recent decades. Specialized breeds are more vulnerable to pathogens, which has boosted the use of antimicrobials by farmers. The selective pressure generated favors the emergence of resistant bacteria, which compromises the effectiveness of this treatment and limits therapeutic options. In addition to increasing costs and mortality rates in the production system, public awareness of this issue has increased. The authorities have imposed restrictive measures to control the use of antimicrobials and have banned their use as growth promoters. This literature review highlights biosecurity and animal welfare to prevent pig diseases. Hence, we describe alternatives to the use of antimicrobials in pig production for the selection of effective non-antibiotic feed additives that help maintain good health and help the pig resist disease when infection occurs.

Indexed as

biosecuritybioticsmicrobial resistanceswinewelfare animal

Identifiers

PMID38685989
PMCPMC11056889

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.