ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Evaluation of Surveillance Strategies of Antimicrobial Consumption in Animals.
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Aquaculture Pathogens and Antimicrobial Resistance: A One Health Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Sales of antimicrobials for veterinary use, Bangladesh, 2023.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial stewardship from a One Health perspective.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026Review
- Antimicrobial Resistance inVeterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Veterinary antimicrobial monitoring systems in Brazil, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands: a descriptive comparison to support system development in Brazil.Science in One Health · 2026Review
- National-Level Consumption of Antimicrobials in the Veterinary Sector in Uganda: A Report on Analysis of Import Data for 2021.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to explore and assess various strategies for monitoring antimicrobial consumption (AMC) in animals, within the context of the One Health approach. Recent studies have shed light on the limited surveillance and data collection for AMC in animals. Using the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention Policy Analytical Framework, we assess global, national, and farm-level surveillance strategies on public health impact and feasibility using evidence from primary, secondary, and grey literature. From this, we identify key policy mechanisms that support the adoption of surveillance while providing specific recommendations. We find that a global strategy, though valuable for benchmarking and policy guidance, faces participation and data visibility challenges. National-level surveillance offers direct inputs into national action plans but struggles with data uniformity and comparability. Farm-level surveillance, while resource-intensive, provides the most granular data for informing specific interventions. We advocate for a multi-faceted approach to AMC surveillance, emphasizing that legal mandates and financial incentives are crucial for encouraging surveillance participation, along with international cooperation for enhancing participation and data quality. Drawing parallels with public reporting challenges in other sectors can provide valuable lessons on how to address data collection, analysis, and reporting barriers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.