## 2 Results
### Political Activity and Involvement

Table 4: Multivariate logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio, aOR) of good as well as fair personal attitudes and perception (AP) and demographic variables. LMIC participants were aware of the implementation of a NAP-AMR in their country. This difference was statistically significant (\(p<0.01\)). More than half (53.1%; 34/64) of the LMIC participants reported that AMR was gaining more popularity in policies and regulations in the country, compared to a smaller proportion (39.2%; 92/143) of HIC participants. More than half of the HIC participants (56.1%; 139/248) reported that AMR interventions addressed both human and animal health, which was statistically different from the LMIC participants (40.3%) (\(p<0.05\)). Accordingly, more LMIC participants (51%; 34/66) reported that AMR plans mainly focus on human health and not on the contribution of livestock. A significantly smaller proportion (33.9%; 45/218) of HIC participants agreed with this statement (\(p<0.05\)) (see Figure 4). Figure 4: Bar plot (proportion (%) with 95% confidence interval) on the first part of statements assessing the political knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions (KAP) of all participants, stratified for high-income country (HIC) and low- and middle-income country (LMIC) participants. The proportion represents participants who answered the statement with agree or strongly agree. Significance: **\({}^{*}\)\(p<0.01\), and **\({}^{*}\)\(p<0.05\)**. More HIC participants (34.7%; 74/213) than LMIC participants (19.7%; 12/61) reported that hospitals in their regions had taken action to control AMR. On the contrary, almost half of the LMIC participants (47.6%; 30/63) indicated that hospitals were willing to act but lacked funding to do so. The proportion that highlighted this financial restraint was only 39.3% (83/211) among HIC participants (\(p<0.05\)). When the participants were asked about the national budget and funding for AMR, less than half (35.6%; 98/275) of all participants reported that the funding and resources had increased in recent years and would be increasing in the future. Nearly everyone (80.1%; 262/327) was aware of the fact that a One Health approach should be integrated into monitoring AMR in their country, and more interventions should integrate this interdisciplinary vision. This awareness was, however, more pronounced among LMIC individuals (87.8%; 59/68) compared to HIC individuals (72.8%; 203/259) (\(p<0.05\)) (See Figure 5). None of the sociodemographic and occupational variables were associated with overall political KAP scores (see Supplementary File 6). The last section of the survey contained  
Figure 5: Bar plot (proportion (%) with 95% confidence interval) on the second part of statements assessing the political knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions (KAP) of all participants, stratified for high-income country (HIC) and low- and middle-income country (LMIC) participants. The proportion represents participants who answered the statement correctly with agree or strongly agree. Significance: * \(p<0.05\). four open questions to get a better understanding of the current strategies and interventions that address AMR from within the participant's governmental level. It aimed to identify the challenges in designing and implementing new AMR strategies. Representatives from all countries addressed the need for sufficient financial resources, promoting awareness, and educating the general public on the involved risks and the tightening of regulations and prescription behaviors to make antimicrobials less easily accessible (see Supplementary File 7). Participants from The Netherlands especially highlighted the need for a coherent international approach rather than a national strategy to mitigate the AMR burden. Many Dutch participants also emphasized the need for more research on environmental transmission, especially the contribution of livestock and potential transmission via wastewater.