| |
|
|
 | Acceso al texto completo restringido a Biblioteca INIA Tacuarembó. Por información adicional contacte bibliotb@tb.inia.org.uy. |
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Tacuarembó. |
|
Fecha : |
09/09/2014 |
|
Actualizado : |
30/09/2019 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Internacionales |
|
Autor : |
FALZON, L.C.; O´NEILL, T.J.; MENZIES, P.I.; PEREGRINE, A.S.; JONES-BITTON, A.; VANLEEUWEN, J.; MEDEROS, A. |
|
Afiliación : |
AMERICA ESTHER MEDEROS SILVEIRA, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
|
Título : |
A systematic review and meta-analysis of factors associated with anthelmintic resistance in sheep. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2014 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 2014, v. 117, p. 388-402. |
|
DOI : |
10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.07.003 |
|
Idioma : |
Inglés |
|
Notas : |
Article history: Received 5 March 2014; Received in revised form 27 May 2014; Accepted 3 July 2014. |
|
Contenido : |
Background: Anthelmintic drugs have been widely used in sheep as a cost-effective meansfor gastro-intestinal nematode (GIN) control. However, growing anthelmintic resistance(AHR) has created a compelling need to identify evidence-based management recommen-dations that reduce the risk of further development and impact of AHR.Objective: To identify, critically assess, and synthesize available data from primary researchon factors associated with AHR in sheep.Methods: Publications reporting original observational or experimental research on selectedfactors associated with AHR in sheep GINs and published after 1974, were identified throughtwo processes. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Agricola, CAB) and Web of Science (acollection of databases) were searched for potentially relevant publications. Additional pub-lications were identified through consultation with experts, manual search of referencesof included publications and conference proceedings, and information solicited from smallruminant practitioner list-serves. Two independent investigators screened abstracts for rel-evance. Relevant publications were assessed for risk of systematic bias. Where sufficientdata were available, random-effects Meta-Analyses (MAs) were performed to estimate thepooled Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) of AHR for factors reported in?2 publications.Results: Of the 1712 abstracts screened for eligibility, 131 were deemed relevant for fullpublication review. Thirty publications describing 25 individual studies (15 observationalstudies, 7 challenge trials, and 3 controlled trials) were included in the qualitative synthesisand assessed for systematic bias. Unclear (i.e. not reported, or unable to assess) or high riskof selection bias and confounding bias was found in 93% (14/15) and 60% (9/15) of theobservational studies, respectively, while unclear risk of selection bias was identified in allof the trials. Ten independent studies were included in the quantitative synthesis, and MAswere performed for five factors. Only high frequency of treatment was a significant riskfactor (OR = 4.39; 95% CI = 1.59, 12.14), while the remaining 4 variables were marginallysignificant: mixed-species grazing (OR = 1.63; 95% CI = 0.66, 4.07); flock size (OR = 1.02; 95%CI = 0.97, 1.07); use of long-acting drug formulations (OR = 2.85; 95% CI = 0.79, 10.24); anddrench-and-shift pasture management (OR = 4.08; 95% CI = 0.75, 22.16). MenosBackground: Anthelmintic drugs have been widely used in sheep as a cost-effective meansfor gastro-intestinal nematode (GIN) control. However, growing anthelmintic resistance(AHR) has created a compelling need to identify evidence-based management recommen-dations that reduce the risk of further development and impact of AHR.Objective: To identify, critically assess, and synthesize available data from primary researchon factors associated with AHR in sheep.Methods: Publications reporting original observational or experimental research on selectedfactors associated with AHR in sheep GINs and published after 1974, were identified throughtwo processes. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Agricola, CAB) and Web of Science (acollection of databases) were searched for potentially relevant publications. Additional pub-lications were identified through consultation with experts, manual search of referencesof included publications and conference proceedings, and information solicited from smallruminant practitioner list-serves. Two independent investigators screened abstracts for rel-evance. Relevant publications were assessed for risk of systematic bias. Where sufficientdata were available, random-effects Meta-Analyses (MAs) were performed to estimate thepooled Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) of AHR for factors reported in?2 publications.Results: Of the 1712 abstracts screened for eligibility, 131 were deemed relevant for fullpublication review. Thirty publications... Presentar Todo |
|
Palabras claves : |
DRENCH RESISTANCE; EVIDENCE-BASED RECOMMENDATIONS; GASTRO-INTESTINAL NEMATODES; MANAGEMENT PRACTICES; QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE SYNTHESIS. |
|
Thesagro : |
OVINOS. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
A50 Investigación agraria |
|
Marc : |
LEADER 03419naa a2200289 a 4500
001 1050071
005 2019-09-30
008 2014 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $a10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.07.003$2DOI
100 1 $aFALZON, L.C.
245 $aA systematic review and meta-analysis of factors associated with anthelmintic resistance in sheep.
260 $c2014
500 $aArticle history: Received 5 March 2014; Received in revised form 27 May 2014; Accepted 3 July 2014.
520 $aBackground: Anthelmintic drugs have been widely used in sheep as a cost-effective meansfor gastro-intestinal nematode (GIN) control. However, growing anthelmintic resistance(AHR) has created a compelling need to identify evidence-based management recommen-dations that reduce the risk of further development and impact of AHR.Objective: To identify, critically assess, and synthesize available data from primary researchon factors associated with AHR in sheep.Methods: Publications reporting original observational or experimental research on selectedfactors associated with AHR in sheep GINs and published after 1974, were identified throughtwo processes. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Agricola, CAB) and Web of Science (acollection of databases) were searched for potentially relevant publications. Additional pub-lications were identified through consultation with experts, manual search of referencesof included publications and conference proceedings, and information solicited from smallruminant practitioner list-serves. Two independent investigators screened abstracts for rel-evance. Relevant publications were assessed for risk of systematic bias. Where sufficientdata were available, random-effects Meta-Analyses (MAs) were performed to estimate thepooled Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) of AHR for factors reported in?2 publications.Results: Of the 1712 abstracts screened for eligibility, 131 were deemed relevant for fullpublication review. Thirty publications describing 25 individual studies (15 observationalstudies, 7 challenge trials, and 3 controlled trials) were included in the qualitative synthesisand assessed for systematic bias. Unclear (i.e. not reported, or unable to assess) or high riskof selection bias and confounding bias was found in 93% (14/15) and 60% (9/15) of theobservational studies, respectively, while unclear risk of selection bias was identified in allof the trials. Ten independent studies were included in the quantitative synthesis, and MAswere performed for five factors. Only high frequency of treatment was a significant riskfactor (OR = 4.39; 95% CI = 1.59, 12.14), while the remaining 4 variables were marginallysignificant: mixed-species grazing (OR = 1.63; 95% CI = 0.66, 4.07); flock size (OR = 1.02; 95%CI = 0.97, 1.07); use of long-acting drug formulations (OR = 2.85; 95% CI = 0.79, 10.24); anddrench-and-shift pasture management (OR = 4.08; 95% CI = 0.75, 22.16).
650 $aOVINOS
653 $aDRENCH RESISTANCE
653 $aEVIDENCE-BASED RECOMMENDATIONS
653 $aGASTRO-INTESTINAL NEMATODES
653 $aMANAGEMENT PRACTICES
653 $aQUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE SYNTHESIS
700 1 $aO´NEILL, T.J.
700 1 $aMENZIES, P.I.
700 1 $aPEREGRINE, A.S.
700 1 $aJONES-BITTON, A.
700 1 $aVANLEEUWEN, J.
700 1 $aMEDEROS, A.
773 $tPreventive Veterinary Medicine, 2014$gv. 117, p. 388-402.
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Tacuarembó (TBO) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
|
|
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
|
Fecha actual : |
05/04/2020 |
|
Actualizado : |
05/04/2020 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Agropecuarias |
|
Autor : |
INIA (INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE INVESTIGACIÓN AGROPECUARIA); PROGRAMA NACIONAL PRODUCCIÓN FORESTAL |
|
Afiliación : |
PROGRAMA NACIONAL DE INVESTIGACIÓN PRODUCCIÓN FORESTAL, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
|
Título : |
La investigación forestal: pilar para garantizar el desarrollo de bosques productivos, sanos y amigables con el medio. Informe especial. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2020 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Revista INIA Uruguay, 2020, no. 60, p. 53-60. |
|
Serie : |
(Revista INIA; 60). |
|
ISSN : |
1510-9011 |
|
Idioma : |
Español |
|
Contenido : |
Con el objetivo de aportar conocimiento técnico desde la investigación científica, y en un vínculo privilegiado con los responsables públicos y privados de la producción forestal uruguaya, el equipo de INIA trabaja con mucha dedicación y convencimiento apuntalando el rol institucional al que se comprometió.
INIA organiza su investigación forestal en tres grandes áreas: Mejoramiento Genético, Protección Forestal y Manejo Forestal. |
|
Palabras claves : |
INVESTIGACIÓN FORESTAL EN URUGUAY. |
|
Thesagro : |
FORESTACIÓN; FORESTALES; PRODUCCION DE MADERA. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
K01 Ciencias forestales - Aspectos generales |
|
URL : |
http://www.ainfo.inia.uy/digital/bitstream/item/14373/1/Rev-INIA-60-Marzo-2020-p-53-60.pdf
|
|
Marc : |
LEADER 01178naa a2200205 a 4500
001 1061000
005 2020-04-05
008 2020 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
022 $a1510-9011
100 1 $aINIA (INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE INVESTIGACIÓN AGROPECUARIA)
245 $aLa investigación forestal$bpilar para garantizar el desarrollo de bosques productivos, sanos y amigables con el medio. Informe especial.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2020
490 $a(Revista INIA; 60).
520 $aCon el objetivo de aportar conocimiento técnico desde la investigación científica, y en un vínculo privilegiado con los responsables públicos y privados de la producción forestal uruguaya, el equipo de INIA trabaja con mucha dedicación y convencimiento apuntalando el rol institucional al que se comprometió. INIA organiza su investigación forestal en tres grandes áreas: Mejoramiento Genético, Protección Forestal y Manejo Forestal.
650 $aFORESTACIÓN
650 $aFORESTALES
650 $aPRODUCCION DE MADERA
653 $aINVESTIGACIÓN FORESTAL EN URUGUAY
700 1 $aPROGRAMA NACIONAL PRODUCCIÓN FORESTAL
773 $tRevista INIA Uruguay, 2020, no. 60, p. 53-60.
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
| Expresión de búsqueda válido. Check! |
|
|
