ReviewPharmacoEconomics1996
Cost-effective prophylaxis of surgical infections.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial prophylaxis in colorectal surgery.Quality in health care : QHC · 1999Pooled it
- Using cost of infection as a tool to demonstrate a difference in prophylactic antibiotic efficacy: a prospective randomized comparison of the pharmacoeconomic effectiveness of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime prophylaxis in abdominal surgery.World journal of surgery · 2005Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are few formal pharmacoeconomic studies of antibacterial prophylaxis in surgery. An important reason for this is that such prophylaxis is difficult to study, because extremely large patient samples are needed to demonstrate differences or equalities with reasonable statistical power. When the cost effectiveness of various regimens is evaluated, indirect methods must often be used. Clearly, the ideal prophylactic regimen, both clinically and economically, is one that is easy to administer, has a low acquisition cost, can be given as a single dose and provides maximal protection against postoperative infections. However, if and when such a regimen is identified, its universal acceptance and use might have negative ecological consequences (e.g. the selection of resistant organisms in the hospital environment). Thus, the search for the ideal prophylactic regimen must be a continuous process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.