ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015
The Resistant-Population Cutoff (RCOFF): a New Concept for Improved Characterization of Antimicrobial Susceptibility Patterns of Non-Wild-Type Bacterial Populations.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Markedly decreasing azithromycin susceptibility ofEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2021Article
- On the Consequences of Poorly Defined Breakpoints for Rifampin Susceptibility Testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Complex.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- MDR M. tuberculosis outbreak clone in Eswatini missed by Xpert has elevated bedaquiline resistance dated to the pre-treatment era.Genome medicine · 2020Article
- A Fundamental Change in Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing Would Better Prevent Therapeutic Failure: From Individual to Population-Based Analysis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- A statistical approach for determination of disk diffusion-based cutoff values for systematic characterization of wild-type and non-wild-type bacterial populations in antimicrobial susceptibility testing.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine resistant-population cutoffs (RCOFFs) to allow for improved characterization of antimicrobial susceptibility patterns in bacterial populations. RCOFFs can complement epidemiological cutoff (ECOFF)-based settings of clinical breakpoints (CBPs) by systematically describing the correlation between non-wild-type and wild-type populations. We illustrate this concept by describing three paradigmatic examples of wild-type and non-wild-type Escherichia coli populations from our clinical strain database of disk diffusion diameters. The statistical determination of RCOFFs and ECOFFs and their standardized applications in antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) facilitates the assignment of isolates to wild-type or non-wild-type populations. This should improve the correlation of in vitro AST data and distinct antibiotic resistance mechanisms with clinical outcome facilitating the setting and validation of CBPs.
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.