ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2003
Comparative analysis of multidrug-resistant, non-multidrug-resistant, and archaic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from Central Sydney, Australia.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification and Discrimination of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Strains Isolated from Burn Wound Sites Using PCR and Authentication with MALDI-TOF-MS.Indian journal of microbiology · 2012Article
- Molecular diagnostics of clinically important staphylococci.Folia microbiologica · 2004Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, the phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of 50 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates (43 contemporary and 7 archaic strains from the mid-1960s) from four Sydney hospitals in the central Sydney area were compared. Phenotypic analysis based on antibiotic profiles and phage typing patterns categorized the MRSA isolates into three major groups: multidrug resistant (mMRSA), non-multidrug resistant (nmMRSA), and archaic. The nmMRSA isolates could be further subdivided into nmMRSA group 1, which was phage typeable and similar to the archaic group; nmMRSA group 2, which was non-phage typeable and only resistant to ciprofloxacin; and nmMRSA group 3, which was also nontypeable and generally resistant to other antibiotics. The characterization of all five phenotypic groups was then extended by genetic analysis. Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis showed the 50 isolates could be sorted into 20 group-specific pulsotypes. mecI gene deletions and mutations at various percentages among the five MRSA groups were detected by sequencing. Several mec promoter mutations were also found. The overall findings indicated that nmMRSA strains may have independently acquired mec DNA and are more likely to be newly emergent strains than nmMRSA variants.
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.