Associations of calf management practices with antimicrobial use in Canadian dairy calves
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The objective of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the relationship between management practices and antimicrobial use in heifer calves on Canadian dairy farms. Questionnaires on calf management practices, herd characteristics, and calf treatment records were administered on 147 dairy farms in 5 provinces during annual farm visits in a multiyear, nationwide research project (Canadian Dairy Network for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Resistance: CaDNetASR). Questions focused on the calf caregiver, calving pen, colostrum management, milk feeding, grouping, bedding management, and age when male calves were sold. Antimicrobial treatment records were collected on each farm from either an electronic herd management system or paper-based records. Newborn heifers born in the last 12 mo were identified retrospectively and followed to 60 d of age, with antimicrobial treatments and dates of sale or death extracted for further analysis. A multivariable linear regression model was developed with the natural log of the number of antimicrobial treatments per calf-year as the dependent variable, and categorized calf management practices and farm characteristics as the independent variables. A complete data set of records on 7,817 calves was retrieved from 74 farms based on completeness of calf records. A total of 2,310 calves were treated at least once with an antimicrobial, and 7,307 individual antimicrobial treatments were recorded. Among the reasons for antimicrobial use, respiratory disease (54%) was most common, followed by diarrhea (20%), presence of a fever (3%), and umbilical disease (2%). Florfenicol (33% of recorded treatments), penicillin (23%), and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (18%) were commonly used, whereas fluoroquinolones (4%), and ceftiofur (1%) were used less commonly. Farms (31%) commonly had 0-1.0 antimicrobial treatments/calf-year (median: 2.2 treatments/calf-year; interquartile range: 0.64-6.43 treatments/calf-year). Defined daily dose (DDD) per calf-year was calculated based on the Canadian bovine standards. Among the 74 farms, florfenicol (1.35 DDD/calf-year) and macrolides (0.73 DDD/calf-year) were used most, whereas ceftiofur (0.008 DDD/calf-year) was the lowest. The final multivariable linear regression model indicated that farms that fed transition milk had fewer than half the number of antimicrobial treatments per calf-year than those who did not feed transition milk. The number of antimicrobial treatments per calf-year in preweaning calves was low on many farms, and there was low use of highly important drugs for human medicine. The effect of feeding transition milk should be investigated regarding potential effects on antimicrobial use and disease prevention.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».