↓ Skip to main content

World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
38 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
124 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
278 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13756-017-0294-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Awa Aidara-Kane, Frederick J. Angulo, John M. Conly, Yuki Minato, Ellen K. Silbergeld, Scott A. McEwen, Peter J. Collignon

Abstract

Antimicrobial use in food-producing animals selects for antimicrobial resistance that can be transmitted to humans via food or other transmission routes. The World Health Organization (WHO) in 2005 ranked the medical importance of antimicrobials used in humans. In late 2017, to preserve the effectiveness of medically important antimicrobials for humans, WHO released guidelines on use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals that incorporated the latest WHO rankings. WHO commissioned systematic reviews and literature reviews, and convened a Guideline Development Group (GDG) of external experts free of unacceptable conflicts-of-interest. The GDG assessed the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and formulated recommendations using a structured evidence-to-decision approach that considered the balance of benefits and harms, feasibility, resource implications, and impact on equity. The resulting guidelines were peer-reviewed by an independent External Review Group and approved by the WHO Guidelines Review Committee. These guidelines recommend reductions in the overall use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals, including complete restriction of use of antimicrobials for growth promotion and for disease prevention (i.e., in healthy animals considered at risk of infection). These guidelines also recommend that antimicrobials identified as critically important for humans not be used in food-producing animals for treatment or disease control unless susceptibility testing demonstrates the drug to be the only treatment option. To preserve the effectiveness of medically important antimicrobials, veterinarians, farmers, regulatory agencies, and all other stakeholders are urged to adopt these recommendations and work towards implementation of these guidelines.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 278 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 278 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 54 19%
Student > Master 38 14%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Researcher 33 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 7%
Other 50 18%
Unknown 50 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 51 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 35 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 4%
Other 61 22%
Unknown 70 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 July 2020.
All research outputs
#989,248
of 18,981,499 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control
#104
of 1,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,158
of 383,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,981,499 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 383,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them