MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W325402124

ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORTS TO HEALTH CANADA ON “ANTIMICROBIALS IN FOOD ANIMALS IN CANADA: IMPACT ON RESISTANCE AND ANIMAL HEALTH”

2002· article· en· W325402124 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueEurope PMC (PubMed Central) · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiquePharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAnimal healthOne HealthStakeholderMedicinePublic healthAnimal welfareMedical prescriptionPopulationAdvisory committeeFormularyEnvironmental healthVeterinary medicineBusinessPolitical scienceFamily medicinePublic relationsNursingPublic administration
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The report of the Committee formed to advise the Veterinary Drugs Directorate of Health Canada on animal uses of antimicrobials and their impact on resistance and human health has just been published (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/vetdrugs-medsvet/amr/e_policy_dev.html). Chaired by Dr Scott McEwen of the Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, the 20-person committee included representatives of farm organizations, the animal pharmaceutical and feed industries, medical and veterinary microbiologists, public health, consumer, and animal welfare organizations. The CVMA was represented by Dr Deb Stark. The report, if acted on, will have a major impact on how antimicrobials are used in food animals in Canada, with a significant increase in veterinary responsibility for their use. The Committee worked for 3 years to produce the 165-page report, focussed on agricultural use of antimicrobial drugs. The report contains a fairly detailed discussion of the evidence of human and animal health impacts of antimicrobial use in food animals, the international response to the problem, stakeholder perspectives on the benefits of antimicrobials in animals, and the options for managing resistance risks. The 38 recommendations are based on its analysis of how to reduce the potential resistance and human health and safety impacts of such use. Six major recommendations are made as follows: Make all antimicrobials used for disease treatment and control available by prescription only. Develop an extra-label use policy, which ensures that this practice does not endanger human health. Such a policy should include the ability to prohibit the extra-label use of specific drugs of critical importance to human health. Evaluate, register, and assign a drug identification number (DIN) to all antimicrobials used for food animals, whether they are manufactured domestically or imported. This includes antimicrobials imported in bulk (active pharmaceutical ingredients [APIs]), which should be allowed into Canada only under permit. The intent of this recommendation is to stop the direct use of APIs in food animals. Stop the importation, sale, and use of antimicrobials not evaluated and registered by Health Canada. The intent of this recommendation is to stop the “own use” loophole. Evaluate antimicrobials for growth promotion or feed efficiency by using sound risk analysis principles and rapidly phase out antimicrobial claims not fulfilling the following criteria: demonstrably effective; rarely, if ever, used in human therapy; and not likely to impair the efficacy of any other prescribed antimicrobial for human infections through development of resistant strains. In consultation with the provinces, other federal agencies, and industry groups, design and implement an ongoing, permanent national surveillance system for antimicrobial resistance arising from food-animal production. Surveillance should include indicator and pathogenic bacteria isolated from animals, food, and imported animal products. Among the more minor recommendations, aimed at veterinarians, the report recommends the following: Recommendation 20: Veterinarians and veterinary medical organizations should effectively implement the prudent-use principles developed by the CVMA and periodically review the principles and their implementation. Recommendation 21: Provincial licensing bodies and veterinary medical associations should endorse and promote the CVMA's prudent-use principles. Recommendation 38: Encourage Canadian veterinary colleges and veterinary associations to ensure that preventative medicine, prudent use of antimicrobials, and antimicrobial resistance are given high priority in veterinary undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education programs. The report discusses producer concerns that prescription-only access to antimicrobial drugs would drive up the cost of animal health care through higher drug costs. While not a formal recommendation, the report suggests that veterinarians are in a conflict of interest when they profit from the sale of antimicrobial drugs, and that ways be found to remove this conflict. Dr. Peter Provis, chair of the CVMA Prudent Use of Antimicrobials Working Group, commented, “The CVMA welcomes this well-argued and authoritative report, including its endorsement of the 1999 CVMA prudent-use principles. The key recommendations of the report should result in more prudent use of antimicrobial drugs in food animals in Canada, and an enhanced responsibility for veterinarians in ensuring better use of these precious resources. The CVMA will support the Veterinary Drug Directorate in its implementation of the recommendations of the report, and will continue its own commitment to prudent use through the education of its members, development and endorsement of species specific guidelines, promotion of involvement of veterinarians in on-farm food safety programs, and in other ways. Reducing antimicrobial resistance requires a long-term effort by everyone using antimicrobial drugs, and implementation of this report will be an important boost to this effort.” (by John F. Prescott, DVM, University of Guelph)

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,188
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,240
Écart entre enseignants0,215 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle