Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17630331›Full record

ReviewClinical microbiology reviews2007

Setting and revising antibacterial susceptibility breakpoints.

John Turnidge, David L Paterson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 235 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
235citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

235 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Impact of borderline minimum inhibitory concentration on the outcome of invasive infections caused by Enterobacteriaceae treated with β-lactams: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. A mini review of genome-predicted β-lactam susceptibility inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

175 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

John TurnidgeDivision of Laboratory Medicine, Women's and Children's Hospital, 72 King William Rd., North Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. john.turnidge@cywhs.sa.gov.au
David L Paterson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical microbiology laboratories need to communicate results of antibacterial susceptibility testing to prescribers. Sophisticated prescribers who are knowledgeable of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antibacterials may desire no more information than the MIC of the drug in question. However, most prescribers require interpretation of antibacterial susceptibility testing results. Breakpoints can assist in determining if an antibacterial is potentially useful in the treatment of a bacterial infection. Breakpoints should be set prior to an antibacterial being used clinically. Breakpoint setting requires integration of knowledge of the wild-type distribution of MICs, assessment of the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of the antibacterial, and study of the clinical outcome of infections when the antibacterial is used. It is mandatory that breakpoints be reviewed when antibacterial agents have been in clinical use for some time, particularly if mechanisms of bacterial resistance to the drug have been described. In general, greater amounts of information on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an antibacterial are available when breakpoints need to be revised. However, the opportunity to conduct randomized clinical studies of an antibacterial declines after the drug has been released commercially. Well-designed observational clinical studies are therefore necessary in order to provide reliable data to inform those reevaluating breakpoints. Breakpoint-setting organizations may also play a role in developing phenotypic tests for detection of resistance mechanisms, as this information may complement use of the breakpoint in some circumstances.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaBacterial InfectionsBiomarkersDrug Resistance, BacterialHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID17630331
PMCPMC1932754

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.