Abstract
BackgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an escalating global health issue with complex and dynamic interdependencies, high uncertainty and decision stakes, multiple drivers and stakeholders with diverse values and interests, and various aspects and outcomes. Addressing and combating this critical global challenge requires the formation and establishment of an interdisciplinary research approach that goes beyond the biosciences principally concerned with antimicrobial resistance to include other relevant natural and social sciences. The objective of this study will be to review and map existing social science knowledge and literature relating to antimicrobial resistance.MethodsThe review team will undertake the scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework and also the Joanna Briggs Institute methods manual. Publications in English (from 1998 onwards) will be searched using several databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Anthropological Plus, Sociological s, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), PsycINFO and EconLit. Grey literature will also be searched (e.g. Google Scholar). Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. Publication types will include original articles, editorials, commentaries, protocols, and books in the social science research literature on AMR. All study designs (quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods) will be included. A PRISMA Flow Diagram of search and study selection will be used to report final figures on included and excluded studies. To provide a descriptive summary of the literature, data will be collated, stored, and charted using Microsoft Excel software. The analysis will also involve identifying themes and gaps in the existing literature and summarizing, describing and displaying all pertinent information using thematic construction approaches including qualitative content analysis methods.DiscussionThis protocol describes a systematic method to identify, map, and synthesize social science research evidence on antimicrobial resistance. By mapping evidence and identifying potential knowledge gaps where further research is warranted, the resulting scoping review will provide useful insights for the design, implementation, and reorientation of future research agendas on AMR at multiple levels.Systematic review registration: This protocol has been registered with the Open Science Framework (OSF): https://osf.io/hyaem.
Highlights
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an escalating global health issue with complex and dynamic interdependencies, high uncertainty and decision stakes, multiple drivers and stakeholders with diverse values and interests, and various aspects and outcomes
It has been predicted that the mortality from infections subject to AMR could result in a reduction of 2% to 3.5% in global gross domestic product (GDP) in 2050, amounting to between 60 and 100 trillion US dollars worldwide [10, 11, 13]
According to the World Bank [14], people and economies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) will experience proportionately greater suffering than high-income countries (HICs) from reduced economic growth and global poverty caused by AMR
Summary
Protocol design The methodological approach draws on a scoping review or scoping study framework. Conceptual/theoretical framework or approach: Domains addressed/focus of study (e.g., prescribing, consuming or dispensing practices, social interactions including user—prescriber and/or professional—institutional interactions, formal/informal aspects, stockholders, contextual factors, drivers, costs and impacts, socio-cultural meanings, images and stigma, intervention development or evaluation, etc.); Key findings that relate to the scoping review question(s) (*what result): Comments on gaps, inconsistencies, biases and unmet needs in AMR research: Reported AMR-related academic activities (e.g., research and teaching programs, fellowships, funded projects; NGOs and networks; program and policy development, campaigns, advocacy, and knowledge exchange activities, regulation and delivery on AMR, etc.): Other emerging information or themes (*what else):. This is consistent with relevant guidance [47, 53]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
