Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27899093›Full record

ArticleBMC ophthalmology2016

Microbiological profile of corneal ulcer cases diagnosed in a tertiary care ophthalmological institute in Nepal.

Sharmila Suwal, Dinesh Bhandari, Pratigya Thapa, Mohan Krishna Shrestha, Jyoti Amatya

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Mycotic Keratitis-A Global Threat from the Filamentous Fungi.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Case reports in ophthalmological medicine · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Microbiological Profile of Corneal Ulcers at a Tertiary Referral Center.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2019
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sharmila SuwalDepartment of Microbiology, Trichandra Multiple College, Ghantaghar, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Dinesh BhandariDepartment of Microbiology, Trichandra Multiple College, Ghantaghar, Kathmandu, Nepal. me.dinesh43@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0979-1406
Pratigya ThapaDepartment of Microbiology, Trichandra Multiple College, Ghantaghar, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Mohan Krishna ShresthaTilganga Institute of Ophthalmology, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Jyoti AmatyaDepartment of Microbiology, Trichandra Multiple College, Ghantaghar, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Tilganga Institute of Ophthalmology · NPTribhuvan University Teaching Hospital · NP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCorneal ulcer, a major cause of monocular blindness in developing countries has consistently been listed as the major cause of blindness and visual disability in many of the developing nations in Asia, Africa and the Middle East, ranking second only to cataract. This study was carried out to determine the microbiological profile of corneal ulcer cases diagnosed among patients visiting Tilganga Institute of Ophthalmology (TIO), Nepal.

methodsA total of 101 corneal scrapping samples were tested for routine culture and antibiotic susceptibility at the pathology department of TIO Nepal from April to October 2014. Microorganisms were identified by using standard microbiological procedures following the manual of American Society for Microbiology (ASM) and their antibiotic susceptibility test, performed by Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method in conformity with the CLSI guideline.

resultsOut of 101 samples analyzed, 44.6% (45/101) showed positive growth with bacterial isolates i.e., 56% (25/45), more prevalent than fungus i.e., 44% (20/45). Among bacteria Streptococcus pneumoniae (31.1%, N = 14) was isolated in highest number whereas Fusarium (13.4%, N = 6) was the most common fungus species. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the only Gram negative bacteria isolated from corneal ulcer cases. All bacterial isolates were found to be susceptible to the quinolone group of antibiotics (moxifloxacin followed by ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin).

conclusionsThese findings showcase the current trend in the microbiological etiology of corneal ulcer in Nepal, which have important public health implications for the treatment as well as prevention of corneal ulceration in the developing world.

Indexed as

AdultAge DistributionAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaCorneaCorneal UlcerCross-Sectional StudiesEye Infections, BacterialEye Infections, FungalFemaleFungiHumansMaleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMiddle AgedNepalAnti-Bacterial AgentsCorneal ulcerMicrobiological profileNepal

Identifiers

PMID27899093
PMCPMC5129215
OpenAlexW2559425422

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.