ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2026
Stakeholder perceptions of gaps in antimicrobial resistance mitigation: a multinational multisectoral survey to inform prioritization of One Health interventions.
Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study examined stakeholder perceptions of gaps in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) mitigation efforts across different sectors and career stages, with the goal of generating insights to support prioritization of One Health interventions. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of AMR stakeholders using a structured questionnaire between October and November 2025. Stakeholders were recruited through international networks across 33 countries on 5 continents. Respondents listed the top three areas in AMR mitigation efforts that they perceived as receiving insufficient attention but require greater focus to reduce the emergence and spread of drug-resistant bacterial infections. We performed thematic analysis, calculated weighted priority scores, conducted an Impact-Effort Matrix analysis, and applied Fisher's exact tests to examine associations between themes, professional sector and career stages. Results: Among 103 respondents, participants spanned nine professional sectors and four career stages. Antimicrobial stewardship (18.8%, weighted score 119) and Environmental AMR and Waste (16.5%, weighted score 108) were the most frequently cited perceived gaps. Impact-Effort Matrix analysis identified four priority areas as Quick Wins (stewardship, IPC, surveillance, and animal health, accounting for 45.7% of impact), two Major Projects (environmental AMR, R&D), three Fill-ins (awareness, One Health, other/cross-cutting), and three Hard Slogs (access, financing, policy). No significant associations were observed between perceived mitigation gaps across professional sector and career stages. Conclusions: The emphasis on antimicrobial stewardship among stakeholders highlights a perceived disconnect between stewardship policy adoption and on-the-ground practice. The Impact-Effort Matrix provides a decision-support tool that may assist policymakers and funders in prioritizing One Health interventions.
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.