ArticleInfectious diseases and therapy2014
Developing a Method for Reporting Patient Harm Due to Antimicrobial Shortages.
Article in Infectious diseases and therapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- How to alleviate the shortage: a scoping review of prevention and management of global drug shortages.BMC public health · 2026Article
- A pharmaceutical policy accident: collision of shareholder capitalism and Chinese state capitalism driving the shortage of an essential antibiotic.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2024Article
- The Impact of COVID-19 on Essential Medicines and Personal Protective Equipment Availability and Prices in Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Risks in Antibiotic Substitution Following Medicine Shortage: A Health-Care Failure Mode and Effect Analysis of Six European Hospitals.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- Article
- Antimicrobial Agent Shortages: The New Norm for Infectious Diseases Physicians.Open forum infectious diseases · 2018Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe number of drug shortages in the United States has increased in recent years. While some literature exists on factors that contribute to antimicrobial shortages, the need remains to accurately gage the level of patient harm incurred as a result of realized antimicrobial shortages. Furthermore, current methods of reporting adverse drug events are known to under-report instances of patient harm. We sought to develop an ongoing and accurate method of reporting patient harm due to antimicrobial shortages, which was convenient, anonymous, and allowed clinicians to estimate the causality due to a shortage.
methodsWe distributed a public SurveyMonkey(®) (SurveyMonkey, Palo Alto, CA, USA) link to gather information regarding institution (for de-duplicating purposes), patient age, sex, antimicrobial product on shortage, type of infection requiring treatment or prophylaxis, adverse event, and patient outcome.
resultsTo date complete data were reported on four patients being treated for infections that included Stenotrophomonas maltophilia bacteremia, Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, neonatal sepsis of unknown etiology, and cytomegalovirus colitis. Antimicrobials that were unavailable to patients included sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim, gentamicin, and foscarnet. Two adverse events (a delay in treatment and an inability to treat with other antimicrobials due to resistance) were attributed with probable causality due to a shortage, while the remaining adverse events (death and an inability to tolerate high oral doses) were attributed to have unlikely and possible causalities due to a shortage, respectively.
conclusionThese methods encourage reports of antimicrobial shortage harms.
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.