Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27573640›Full record

ReviewDrugs2016

Intravenous Minocycline: A Review in Acinetobacter Infections.

Sarah L Greig, Lesley J Scott

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Phage Therapy forAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  3. Turning the Tide Against Carbapenem-resistantOpen forum infectious diseases · 2025
    Article
  4. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025
    Review
  5. Carbapenem Resistance inMicroorganisms · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. The intricacies ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Treatment of infections caused by carbapenem-resistantFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Similarities and differences between doxycycline and minocycline: clinical and antimicrobial stewardship considerations.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018
    Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah L GreigSpringer, Private Bag 65901, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, 0754, New Zealand. demail@springer.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0364-8377
Lesley J ScottSpringer, Private Bag 65901, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, 0754, New Zealand.
Bayer (New Zealand) · NZSpringer Nature (New Zealand) · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intravenous minocycline (Minocin

Indexed as

Acinetobacter baumanniiAcinetobacter InfectionsAdministration, IntravenousDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialHumansMinocyclineRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRetrospective StudiesMinocycline

Identifiers

PMID27573640
OpenAlexW2507153616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.