Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41935082›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Antimicrobial resistance risks associated with wild boar consumption and handling: knowledge, attitudes and practices in selected Italian regions.

Claire Julie Akwongo, Maria Francesca Peruzy, Kurt Houf, Luca Borrelli, Alessandro Fioretti, Nicoletta Murru

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Claire Julie AkwongoDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via Federico Delpino 1, Naples, 80137, Italy.
Maria Francesca PeruzyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via Federico Delpino 1, Naples, 80137, Italy. mariafrancesca.peruzy@unina.it.
Kurt HoufDepartment of Veterinary and Biosciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, Merelbeke, 9820, Belgium.
Luca BorrelliDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via Federico Delpino 1, Naples, 80137, Italy.
Alessandro FiorettiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via Federico Delpino 1, Naples, 80137, Italy.
Nicoletta MurruDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via Federico Delpino 1, Naples, 80137, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistant (AMR) organisms can be transmitted to humans by wildlife including wild boars through environmental contamination or through the food chain. Understanding the risks associated with handling and consuming wild boar meat is crucial for ensuring consumer safety. This study assessed knowledge on wild boar associated AMR risks, attitudes towards AMR risk mitigation efforts and supporting practices (KAP) among participants from eight regions of Italy. Data was collected using a standardized online questionnaire. Responses were weighted using the Likert scale and categorized according to Bloom’s cut off points. Associations between KAP scores and determinants were assessed using linear regression analyses and Kendall’s tau rank correlation. A total of 97 responses were received from 53 adult female and 44 adult males, among whom were 66 (68%) consumers and 31 (32%) non consumers of wild boar meat. The mean knowledge score was 27.8%, mean attitude score was 42.7% and mean practices score was 77.4%. There was a positive correlation between knowledge and attitude scores (τ = 0.52, P < 0.05), but not with practices (τ < 0.3, P > 0.05). Regression analyses revealed that the levels of knowledge, attitudes and practices varied significantly (P < 0.001) between genders, age groups and sector of occupation but not education levels (P > 0.05). The findings reveal a need for reinforcement and enrichment of the existing AMR awareness creation tools to include information on AMR and food safety risks from wildlife.

Indexed as

Food HandlingHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeMeatSus scrofaAdultAnimalsFemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesSwineAntibiotic resistanceFood safetyPublic healthWild boar

Identifiers

PMID41935082
PMCPMC13201531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.