Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16081917›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2005

Results of disk diffusion testing with cefoxitin correlate with presence of mecA in Staphylococcus spp.

Jana M Swenson, Fred C Tenover, Cefoxitin Disk Study Group

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 183 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Ecological Dynamics ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Trends, Seasonality, and the Impact of COVID-19 on ClinicalAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Antimicrobial resistance ofOpen veterinary journal · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Multidrug-ResistantVeterinary sciences · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance of BacteriaAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jana M SwensonDivision of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mailstop G08, 1600 Clifton Rd., Atlanta, GA 30333, USA. jswenson@cdc.gov
Fred C Tenover
Cefoxitin Disk Study Group
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The cefoxitin disk diffusion (DD) test for predicting mecA-mediated oxacillin resistance in staphylococci was assessed during a three-phase study. In phase 1, one laboratory tested 62 and 53 strains of Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), respectively. These data were used to choose the provisional cefoxitin DD breakpoints (resistant/susceptible) of < or =19 mm/> or =20 mm for S. aureus and < or =24 mm/> or =25 mm for CoNS for the next phase of testing. In phase 2, 10 laboratories each tested approximately 40 in-house strains of staphylococci (half of which were S. aureus) using Mueller-Hinton agar from different manufacturers. In this phase, the sensitivity and specificity, respectively, of the cefoxitin disk test were 98 and 100% for S. aureus and 99 and 96% for CoNS. The cefoxitin DD test performed equivalently to oxacillin broth microdilution (BMD) and to oxacillin DD tests among S. aureus and mecA-positive CoNS strains but gave better results than oxacillin BMD or oxacillin DD for mecA-negative strains of CoNS. The cefoxitin DD test also was much easier to read and did not require the use of transmitted light for detection of resistance. Based on data from the first two phases, the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI; formerly NCCLS) adopted the use of the cefoxitin DD test for predicting mecA-mediated oxacillin resistance in staphylococci and revised Table 2C in CLSI document M100-S14 to reflect the change. In the third phase, an additional 61 challenge strains of CoNS for which the oxacillin MICs were 0.5 to 2 microg/ml were tested in a single laboratory to determine the effectiveness of the cefoxitin DD test for this group of borderline-resistant isolates. These data were used to refine the description of the test in CLSI document M100-S15. The cefoxitin DD test is preferred over the oxacillin DD test for predicting mecA-mediated oxacillin resistance in S. aureus and CoNS.

Indexed as

Microbial Sensitivity TestsBacterial ProteinsCefoxitinDiffusionDrug Resistance, BacterialOxacillinPenicillin-Binding ProteinsStaphylococcus aureusBacterial ProteinsCefoxitinmecA protein, Staphylococcus aureusOxacillinPenicillin-Binding Proteins

Identifiers

PMID16081917
PMCPMC1233887
OpenAlexW2119732858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.