Paper detail

Mapping the landscape of mathematical models for antimicrobial resistance: a scoping review

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major global public health problem, contributing to an estimated 4.95 million deaths in 2019 and projected to cause up to 10 million deaths annually and 100 trillion dollars in cumulative economic losses by 2050. Its emergence and spread result from complex biological, ecological, and socioeconomic interactions. Mathematical modelling is a key tool to study AMR dynamics, yet the literature remains fragmented and methodologically limited. This review synthesizes recent mathematical modelling studies to identify trends, biases, and research gaps. Methods: A scoping review following PRISMA-ScR guidelines was conducted. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for studies published between 2019 and 2024 that developed mathematical models of AMR. After screening and duplicate removal, 36 studies were included. Data were extracted using a structured framework covering model context, construction and parameters, and outputs and validation. Results: Most studies relied on deterministic ordinary differential equation (ODE) models and focused on bacterial resistance in human hosts, with only one adopting a One Health perspective. Conjugation and mutation were the most commonly modelled resistance mechanisms, whereas transduction, transformation, host immunity, spatial heterogeneity, and environmental components were rarely included. Few studies incorporated economic impacts, and a strong geographic bias toward high-income countries was observed. Conclusion: Mathematical modelling of AMR is an active field but characterized by limited methodological diversity. While deterministic ODE models have advanced understanding of AMR dynamics, future work should integrate stochasticity, spatial structure, ecological interactions, and One Health perspectives, as well as economic and social variables, to inform global strategies to mitigate AMR.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.