ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2025
What do complementary and alternative medicines mean to UK dairy farmers and how do they use them?
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is used by some farmers to support herd health management practices. There is concern by a large majority of the veterinary community, who consider CAM to be counter to evidence-based practice. Little is known about what and how CAM is used on farms, and it is not clear which products or practices are encompassed by what farmers consider to be CAM. This paper reports on a study exploring the use of CAM on dairy farms in the UK. Methods: Twenty farms with a range of management systems and herd sizes were recruited. Interviews were conducted with 24 farmers via face-to-face, telephone or videoconferencing modalities necessitated by the Covid-19 movement restrictions. 16 farms were visited to collect observational data using ethnographic fieldnotes and photographs. Interviews were conducted using topic guides and explored participants' experience of CAM and potential influence on antibiotic use. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed using NViVo software. Results: A range of views and conceptualisation of CAM was identified among the participating dairy farmers. CAM was not usually seen as one particular product or health management tool but encompassed a range of health management strategies and philosophies. Results indicated that some farmers explore and engage with a range of complementary and alternative medicines and approaches to animal health on dairy farms. Some farmers considered food products, shop bought products, environmental enrichment, in-depth animal observations and technology to form part of their CAM approach. Farmers associated CAM with holistic health management and animal welfare. CAM formed part of a wider ethos regarding holistic farming and land use and was sometimes used to support them in avoiding overuse of antibiotics. Discussion: Farmers use CAM, and their conceptualisation of it is complex. Several resources and stakeholders were consulted by farmers to understand CAM and conventional medicine. Farmers interest in CAM warrants further consideration. This may support dairy farmers to reduce antimicrobial use responsibly, with veterinary support.
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.