ArticleIJID one health2026
Prevalence of antibiotic residues in commercial poultry feed and meat from industrial and backyard poultry in Iquitos, Perú.
Article in IJID 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to determine the presence and prevalence of antibiotics in poultry feed and poultry meat in a region with high rates of highly antimicrobial resistant Methods: Poultry feed was collected from local commercial feed stores over a period of 6 months. Standard open bag initial, growth, and fattening mixes were sampled at each commercial retailer. Meat was collected from local supermarkets, a central open-air market, and four open-air markets in small communities that raise their chicken in the community. Animal feed and meat were tested for the phenotypic presence of antibiotics using the Premi-Test, a bioassay that detects antimicrobials from multiple classes. Results: A total of 59 poultry feed samples were obtained, of which 49.2% were found to have detectable antimicrobial additives, and this did not differ between three classes of feed despite no labeling or claims of being a product that contains antimicrobials. Meat samples from 177 industrially produced broilers from supermarkets (n = 85) and open-air markets (n = 92) were evaluated for antibiotic residues. Antibiotics were detected in 27.7% of samples with no significant differences in prevalence between the market types. An additional 99 meat samples were obtained from regional chickens purchased from open markets in urban and rural open-air markets, which had antibiotic residues in 35.4% of samples. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of antibiotic residues in meat from broilers and regional chickens. Conclusions: Minimally processed poultry feed and poultry meat frequently had detectable antibiotics across different sectors of the poultry production chain. Antibiotic residues were frequently detected in chicken meat, whether it was purchased in supermarkets or through open-air markets. Backyard chickens reared in the community and thought to represent a more natural food source had the same prevalence of antibiotic residues as industrially produced chicken.
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.