ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2014
Antibiogram of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in patients with diabetes.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibiotic resistance in Pakistan: a systematic review of past decade.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Prevalence, risk factors, and innovative therapies for methicillin-resistantOpen veterinary journal · 2026Review
- Silver Sulfadiazine Eradicates Antibiotic-TolerantJournal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of clinical isolates ofPakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the antibiogram of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in patients with diabetes.
methodsThe study was carried out in the Microbiology Department of Clinical and Research Laboratory, Baqai Institute of Diabetology and Endocrinology (BIDE) from January 2012 to December 2012. All samples received in the laboratory were processed according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines. Identification of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was done and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern was determined by disc diffusion method.
resultsA total of 585 pathogens were isolated from 542 specimens of patients with diabetes. One hundred twenty one (20.68%) Pseudomonas aeruginosa and 25(4.27%) non-aeruginosa Pseudomonas were detected from 542 samples. Among 108 (18%) samples detecting the growth of Staphylococcus aureus, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were found in 42 (39%) samples. Pseudomonas aeruginosa showed marked susceptibility to imipenem (100%) followed by piperacillin / tazobactam (90.91%). All MRSA positive specimens were susceptible to vancomycin, but highly or completely resistant to the other antimicrobial drugs. Conclusion : In the present study imipenem, piperacillin/tazobactam and sulbactam-cefoperazone were found to be the most effective drugs against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The majority of MRSA were resistant to one or more than one antimicrobial drugs. Vancomycin and imipenem were the most effective drugsagainstStaphylococcus aureus and MRSA. .
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.