ArticleThe Veterinary record2026
Reusing health records from farm animal practices at scale: A potential complementary method of surveillance.
Article in The Veterinary record, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Interventions to Reduce Antibiotic Prescribing in Small Animal Veterinary Practice: Evidence and Clinical Impact.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDisease in primary care frequently represents a surveillance blind spot, particularly for diseases affecting farm animals.
methodsElectronic health records (EHRs) were collected from four farm animal veterinary practices in Wales (February 2024‒January 2025) as part of a pilot study. Information collected included species treated, date, owner postcode, products sold and clinical free text. Text mining and topic modelling were used to describe treatments and classify syndromes.
resultsIn total, 32,799 records were collected. Antimicrobials were prescribed in 32.6% and 63.8% of cattle and sheep records, respectively. The most frequent antibiotic classes in both species were tetracyclines, macrolides, penicillins and penicillin‒aminoglycoside combinations. There were no recorded category A antimicrobials, and category B antimicrobials were prescribed in only 0.12% and 0.04% of cattle and sheep EHRs, respectively. Text mining and topic modelling seemed efficient methods to identify key syndromes, including mastitis, joint ill, lameness and pneumonia, and how these were treated. LIMITATIONS: Some EHRs described more than one animal with different diagnoses, obfuscating the attribution of treatment to syndrome.
conclusionThe increasing availability of EHRs at scale and in real-time represents a complementary opportunity to survey disease and treatment on farms. Text mining methods, including artificial intelligence, could efficiently identify important syndromes and provide novel insight into use of antibacterials.
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.