Observational studyThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2016
Antimicrobial stewardship: are we failing in cross-specialty clinical engagement?
Observational study in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ten golden rules for optimal antibiotic use in hospital settings: the WARNING call to action.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Review
- Surgeons, Infectious Diseases, and Twitter Hit a Home Run for Antibiotic Stewardship.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022Article
- Educational resource for antimicrobial resistance and stewardship for dentistry programmes: a research protocol.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Rethinking the Journal Impact Factor and Publishing in the Digital Age.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2020Review
- Forecasting Implementation, Adoption, and Evaluation Challenges for an Electronic Game-Based Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention: Co-Design Workshop With Multidisciplinary Stakeholders.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- A whole-health-economy approach to antimicrobial stewardship: Analysis of current models and future direction.PLoS medicine · 2019Review
- Nurse roles in antimicrobial stewardship: lessons from public sectors models of acute care service delivery in the United Kingdom.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2019Article
- How can Multi-Professional Education Support Better Stewardship?Infectious disease reports · 2017Review
- Behaviour change interventions to influence antimicrobial prescribing: a cross-sectional analysis of reports from UK state-of-the-art scientific conferences.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2017Article
- Antimicrobial Stewardship: A Call to Action for Surgeons.Surgical infections · 2016Review
- Exploring the coverage of antimicrobial stewardship across UK clinical postgraduate training curricula.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2016Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a public health priority and leading patient safety issue. Globally, antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) has been integral in promoting therapeutic optimization whilst minimizing harmful antimicrobial use. A cross-sectional, observational study was undertaken to investigate the coverage of AMS and antibacterial resistance across clinical scientific conferences in 2014, as a surrogate marker for current awareness and attributed importance.
methodsClinical specialties were identified, and the largest corresponding clinical scientific/research conferences in 2014 determined (i) within the UK and (ii) internationally. Conference characteristics and abstracts were interrogated and analysed to determine those related to AMS and AMR. Inter-specialty variation was assessed using χ(2) or Fisher's exact statistical analysis.
resultsIn total, 45 conferences from 23 specialties were analysed representing 59,682 accepted abstracts. The UK had a significantly greater proportion of AMS-AMR-related abstracts compared with international conferences [2.8% (n = 221/7843) compared with 1.8% (n = 942/51,839); P < 0.001]. Infection conferences contained the greatest proportion of AMS-AMR abstracts, representing 20% (732/3669) of all abstracts [UK 66% (80/121) and international 18% (652/3548); P < 0.0001]. AMS-AMR coverage across all general specialties was poor [intensive care 9% (116/1287), surgical 1% (8/757) and medical specialties 0.64% (332/51,497)] despite high usage of antimicrobials across all.
conclusionsDespite current AMS-AMR strategies being advocated by infection specialists and discussed by national and international policy makers, AMS-AMR coverage remained limited across clinical specialty scientific conferences in 2014. We call for further intervention to ensure specialty engagement with AMS programmes and promote the AMR agenda across clinical practice.
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.