Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26342570›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2015

Prevalence and susceptibility of uropathogens: a recent report from a teaching hospital in Bangladesh.

Rezwana Haque, Most Laila Akter, Md Abdus Salam

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Isolation ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Patterns ofIndian journal of microbiology · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rezwana HaqueDepartment of Microbiology, Islami Bank Medical College, Rajshahi, Bangladesh. sharifjibs@gmail.com.
Most Laila AkterDepartment of Microbiology, Islami Bank Medical College, Rajshahi, Bangladesh. lailaakterdr@gmail.com.
Md Abdus SalamDepartment of Microbiology, Rajshahi Medical College, Rajshahi, 6000, Bangladesh. drsalamrmc@yahoo.com.
Rajshahi Medical College · BD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis investigation was aimed to determine the current status of prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility of uropathogens isolated in a teaching hospital in Bangladesh. A retrospective analysis was done at the department of Microbiology of Islami Bank Medical College, Rajshahi (IBMCR), Bangladesh during January to December, 2012. Midstream clean-catch urine samples were collected from 443 suspected urinary tract infection patients of different age and sex groups. Uropathogens were identified by standard and specific microbiological techniques and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern was determined by Kirby Bauer Disc diffusion method following Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines.

findingsCulture yielded a total of 189 (42.66%) significant growths of uropathogens including 179 (94.71%) unimicrobial (single bacterial species) and 10 (5.29%) polymicrobial (pair of two different bacterial species) growths. Gender distribution showed 34.44% male and 48.29% female UTI patients with male to female ratio of 1:1.46, respectively. E. coli was the predominant isolate (59.30%), followed by Staph saprophyticus (19.09%), Enterococcus spp. (11.56%), Klebsiella spp. (5.53%), Pseudomonas spp. (2.01%), Proteus spp. (1.51%) and Enterobacter spp. (1.00%). Very high frequency of resistance ranging from 72.03 to 91.53% to cotrimoxazole, ciprofloxacin, cefuroxime, cephradin, amoxicillin and nalidixic acid, moderately high resistance to ceftriaxone (55.08%) and gentamicin (40.68%) and low resistance to nitrofurantoin (16.10%) were shown by E. coli. Similarly, Staph. saprophyticus and Enterococcus spp. showed low resistance (18.42 and 21.74%) to nitrofurantoin, but moderately high against cefaclor, gentamycin, cefuroxime and ceftriaxone. Klebsiella spp. and Proteus spp. were 72.73 and 66.67% susceptible, respectively to gentamycin only but low frequency of susceptibility (<50%) was found to all other antimicrobial agents. Peudomonas spp. was 75% susceptible to nitrofurantoin only and showed 75-100% resistance to all other agents. Enterobacter spp. were 50% resistant to nitrofurantoin, gentamycin, cefuroxime, cefaclor and ceftriaxone but showed 100% resistance to all remaining antimicrobials.

conclusionsCurrent uropathogens showed the highest rate of susceptibility to nitrofurantoin and gentamicin which can be adapted for empirical treatment of urinary tract infections.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaBacterial InfectionsBangladeshDrug Resistance, BacterialFemaleHospitals, TeachingHumansMaleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPrevalenceRetrospective StudiesUrinary Tract InfectionsUropathogenic Escherichia coliAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID26342570
PMCPMC4560919
OpenAlexW1754118718

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.