Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39497949›Full record

ArticleOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2024

The burden of antimicrobial resistance in livestock: A framework to estimate its impact within the Global Burden of Animal Diseases programme.

Sara Babo Martins, João Sucena Afonso, Christina Fastl, Benjamin Huntington, Jonathan Rushton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Impact of antibiotic use onVeterinary world · 2025
    Article
  10. Livestock Antibiotics Use and Antimicrobial Resistance.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Sara Babo MartinsInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
João Sucena AfonsoInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Christina FastlInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Benjamin HuntingtonInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Jonathan RushtonInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In addition to affecting animal health and production, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in livestock can have far-reaching social and economic consequences, including on human health and the environment. Given the diversity of data needs and the absence of standardised methodologies, the scale of antimicrobial use (AMU) and AMR's social and economic burden on livestock is complex to gauge. Yet, quantifying this impact can be an essential input for farm-level decision-making and, more widely, for policy development, public awareness, resource allocation to interventions and research and development prioritisation, particularly in a One Health context. This work proposes a conceptual framework to guide the assessment of the burden of AMU and AMR in livestock using the Global Burden of Animal Diseases (GBADs) approach. Its development identified and mapped critical socio-economic concepts in AMU and AMR in livestock and their relationships. The Animal Health Loss Envelope (AHLE), a monetary metric that sets a boundary for overall losses from health hazards and allows an understanding of the relative importance of health problems in livestock, was used as the metric in which the concepts and data needs for the AMU and AMR assessment were anchored. The proposed framework identifies pathways for losses and data inputs needed to estimate the burden of AMU and AMR within this wider envelope of losses. These include information on health expenditure and mortality and morbidity effects related to AMR in livestock. This work highlights the need for improved health and production data collection in livestock production as an essential stepping stone to accurately producing AMU and AMR burden estimates.

Indexed as

AMRAMUBurden of diseaseConceptual frameworkEconomic impactLivestockOne healthSocial impact

Identifiers

PMID39497949
PMCPMC11533088

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.