ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2025
The influence of an animal's social significance on veterinary antimicrobial use-A hierarchy of care.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a pressing global challenge, and veterinary antimicrobial use is a central focus of regulatory and professional scrutiny. While international policy increasingly requires detailed reporting of veterinary AMU, the social dynamics shaping how and why antimicrobials are prescribed, used, and followed up remain poorly understood. This study applies Social Practice Theory, to explore how AMU is enacted across two contrasting species (dairy cattle and dogs) in three countries with differing AMU profiles: Brazil, Spain, and Sweden. The analysis combined policy and guideline review with 187 semi-structured interviews with veterinary specialists, clinicians, farmers, veterinary students, and dog tutors. Interviews examined how common health problems are observed, diagnosed, treated, and followed up, and how participants defined "optimal antimicrobial use" in their contexts. Our reflexive thematic analysis identified five interconnected themes: (1) species-based hierarchies of care, where the perceived value of animals structured AMU tolerance and diagnostic rigor; (2) imagined animal needs, shaped by assumptions of caretaker expectations or legal boundaries; (3) blurred professional roles, with diagnosis and treatment often shared among farmers, technicians, and suppliers; (4) fragile follow-up practices, where "no news" was commonly taken as treatment success and monitoring systems reduced stewardship to counting doses; and (5) entrenched treatment-first logics, in which antimicrobials became the default response, reinforced by professional habits, regulatory scripts, and cultural valuation of animals. This study highlights the importance of recognizing how animals' social significance underpins veterinary practices and AMU decisions. Integrating social theory with ethical considerations provides a more nuanced understanding of veterinary practice and antimicrobial stewardship. By foregrounding species-based hierarchies of care, the research demonstrates how animals' social meanings shape antimicrobial decisions, with implications for animal welfare and public health.
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.