ArticleGlobal health action2025
Stakeholder views on the implementation of the UK's Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) National Action Plan (2019-2024) in relation to AMR in the environment.
Article in Global health action, 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
backgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) in the environment is an important component of One Health AMR research and is increasingly incorporated into AMR National Action Plans (NAPs), including the UK's AMR NAP 'Tackling antimicrobial resistance 2019-2024'. However, implementation of the environmental commitments has yet to be evaluated.
objectiveIn this study, we aimed to understand UK stakeholder perspectives on the delivery and implementation of the environmental components of the UK's AMR NAP 2019-2024, with a particular focus on wastewater, which could be used to inform the 2024-2029 NAP.
methodsWe undertook semi-structured, qualitative interviews with informed UK stakeholders to discuss how the NAP had been implemented and future directions relevant to environmental AMR.
resultsTwo main themes emerged from the interviews: 1) the perception of 'risk', and 2) barriers that have hampered policy action. Some wanted more evidence to inform policy and mitigations, particularly concerning the relative risk posed by different pollution sources in driving and maintaining AMR in the environment, and the risk posed by transmission of AMR from the environment to humans. Where evidence was lacking, several academics and regulators proposed that policy action could be justified based on the precautionary principle.
conclusionsAlthough we do not know the impact environmental exposure plays in driving clinical AMR infections relative to other sources, evidence suggests that exposure to environmental and wastewater sources may play a role, and thus requires policy interventions. Government leadership is critical for ensuring the uptake of environmental AMR research to inform mitigation and interventions based on the precautionary principle.
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.