Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42004408›Full record

ReviewScience in One Health2026

Veterinary antimicrobial monitoring systems in Brazil, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands: a descriptive comparison to support system development in Brazil.

Jessica Kayamori Lopes, Briana Gomes, Bruno Machuca Thon, Saulo Henrique Weber, Ruan Rolnei Daros, Fernando Bittencourt Luciano, Claudia Turra Pimpao

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Science in One Health, 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

7 authors.

Jessica Kayamori LopesPrograma de Pós-graduação em Ciência Animal, Escola de Medicina e Ciências da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, 80215-901, Brazil.
Briana GomesPrograma de Pós-graduação em Ciência Animal, Escola de Medicina e Ciências da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, 80215-901, Brazil.
Bruno Machuca ThonPrograma de Pós-graduação em Ciência Animal, Escola de Medicina e Ciências da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, 80215-901, Brazil.
Saulo Henrique WeberPrograma de Pós-graduação em Ciência Animal, Escola de Medicina e Ciências da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, 80215-901, Brazil.
Ruan Rolnei DarosPrograma de Pós-graduação em Ciência Animal, Escola de Medicina e Ciências da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, 80215-901, Brazil.
Fernando Bittencourt LucianoPrograma de Pós-graduação em Ciência Animal, Escola de Medicina e Ciências da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, 80215-901, Brazil.
Claudia Turra PimpaoPrograma de Pós-graduação em Ciência Animal, Escola de Medicina e Ciências da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, 80215-901, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of antimicrobial agents in animals contributes to the emergence and spread of bacterial antimicrobial resistance, posing risks to human, animal, and environmental health. Monitoring antimicrobial consumption in food-producing animals is a critical component of antimicrobial stewardship. This study describes the current state of antimicrobial use and resistance monitoring in animals in Brazil and compares it to systems implemented in the United Kingdom (UK) and the Netherlands, countries known for having well-established surveillance frameworks. Data were collected between July 2019 and November 2025 from official technical reports on veterinary antimicrobial sales and use, as well as policy documents and legislation. Findings show that the UK and the Netherlands have developed integrated systems based on mandatory data reporting and sector-specific metrics. These systems are supported by coordinated policies and high stakeholder engagement. In contrast, Brazil lacks a national system for monitoring antimicrobial use in animals. Sales data are not publicly available, and there is no standardized mechanism to track antimicrobial consumption on farms. Although policy frameworks exist, enforcement is limited, and access to surveillance data is fragmented. The absence of a centralized, transparent system hinders Brazil's capacity to evaluate antimicrobial use patterns or inform targeted interventions. Given Brazil's leading role in global animal protein production, addressing these gaps is essential to advancing national stewardship efforts and contributing to global strategies to contain bacterial antimicrobial resistance.

Indexed as

Antimicrobial resistance monitoringAntimicrobial stewardshipAntimicrobial use monitoringOne HealthPublic health policy

Identifiers

PMID42004408
PMCPMC13084643

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.