ArticleWellcome open research2026
Acrobatics for Antibiotics: Exploring circus-based engagement on community practices surrounding antimicrobial resistance in Cambodia.
Article in Wellcome open research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engaging youth in health and research in rural Cambodia: a qualitative study.Global health action · 2026Article
- Community perceptions, trust, and experiences of malaria clinical research and participation in rural Cambodia.Tropical medicine and health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing public health threat, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where antibiotic misuse is common and awareness is limited. In Cambodia, misconceptions about antibiotics, such as their use for viral infections and common ailments, are widespread. Culturally relevant strategies are needed to communicate complex health messages to diverse audiences. This study aims to explore the impact of a co-designed, circus-based engagement project on community understanding and perceptions of AMR and antibiotics. Methods: A qualitative case study design was employed. From May 20 to June 25, 2025, data were collected through 15 Semi-Structured Interviews (SSI) and three Focus Group Discussions (FGD) following performances in Battambang and Siem Reap provinces. Participants represented varied backgrounds and ages (16-60 years). The SSIs and FGDs, conducted in Khmer and translated into English, were complemented by field observations from live performances. All transcripts underwent thematic analysis, and findings are presented based on the research question. Results: Four key themes were identified: (1) Baseline knowledge and misconceptions ‒ antibiotics were often seen as general-purpose medicines, (2) Community medicine use ‒ treatment-seeking relied heavily on informal sellers, peer recommendations, and often entailed incomplete courses, (3) Audience interpretation of the performances ‒ humour and familiar scenarios supported message recall, though some confusion remained, (4) Key takeaways and intended change ‒ many participants reported plans to seek medical advice from appropriate health services before taking antibiotics and to share correct information with others. Conclusions: Circus-based engagement was received as a creative and culturally resonant form of health communication that could translate complex biomedical concepts into accessible, and memorable narratives. In Southeast Asia and other LMIC settings with high AMR burdens, such co-designed approaches to knowledge translation could complement conventional education strategies and bridge the gap between scientific knowledge and everyday health practices.
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.