Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22033257›Full record

ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings2011

Antimicrobial stewardship.

Shira Doron, Lisa E Davidson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 182 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
182citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

182 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. "Overview of Global Challenges in Dealing with Neonatal Sepsis and Responsibility of Healthcare Workers": A Narrative Review.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine · 2026
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Shira DoronDivision of Geographic Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
Lisa E Davidson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance is increasing; however, antimicrobial drug development is slowing. Now more than ever before, antimicrobial stewardship is of the utmost importance as a way to optimize the use of antimicrobials to prevent the development of resistance and improve patient outcomes. This review describes the why, what, who, how, when, and where of antimicrobial stewardship. Techniques of stewardship are summarized, and a plan for implementation of a stewardship program is outlined.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAnti-Bacterial AgentsDecision Support TechniquesDrug Resistance, MicrobialDrug UtilizationDrug Utilization ReviewFormularies as TopicHumansPharmacy Service, HospitalPractice Guidelines as TopicQuality Assurance, Health CareUnited StatesAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID22033257
PMCPMC3203003

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.