MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406914529 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2024.1456605

Gender and antimicrobial resistance: a conceptual framework for researchers working in livestock systems

2025· article· en· W4406914529 on OpenAlexafffund
Fiona Emdin, Alessandra Galié, Arshnee Moodley, Susan Rogers Van Katwyk

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersInternational Livestock Research InstituteWellcome Trust
KeywordsLivestockAntibiotic resistanceResistance (ecology)Conceptual frameworkOne HealthBiotechnologyBiologySociologyMedicineMicrobiologyPublic healthSocial scienceEcologyNursingAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: To promote gender mainstreaming in future AMR research projects and policy implementation within livestock and other systems, researchers need to embrace gender-responsive research methodologies. Ignoring gender considerations can lead to unsustainable interventions and exacerbate existing equity gaps. Incorporating gender analysis is crucial for identifying data collection needs and opportunities to develop gender-responsive research programs and policies. Objectives: We have developed a conceptual framework and a set of research questions designed to enhance the gender-responsiveness of AMR research in livestock systems. Methods: A narrative review previously identified three key entry points for gender dynamic impacting AMR in agricultural systems: gendered antimicrobial resistance exposure, gendered antimicrobial use and gendered outcomes of antimicrobial resistance infections. This information was then analyzed using a health system gender framework. Combining these insights, we developed a comprehensive list of research questions. Results: We developed comprehensive list of gender-related questions. Given the limited understanding of how gender dynamics and norms influence AMR, we have primarily proposed qualitative, exploratory questions. These questions are categorized into two types: integrated and strategic. Integrated questions offer a deeper understanding of gender dynamics and norms in livestock systems with the aim of improving them, while strategic questions focus on gender-related issues in livestock as entry points, highlighting some of the mechanisms behind these gender issues to progress towards gender equality. Conclusion: As gender-analysis in livestock research gains prominence, there is an increasing expectation for AMR researchers to integrate gender considerations into their work. This framework provides a starting point for researchers aiming to enhance gender inclusivity and considerations in AMR research within livestock systems. The next phase of our project will involve applying this framework in the field, where a real-life application will enable its validation and further refinement.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.158
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Veterinary ScienceSame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207