Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28424831›Full record

ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2017

[Recurrent and catheter-associated urinary tract infections : Prophylaxis and prevention].

H Piechota

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Strategies for Preventing Catheter-associated Urinary Tract Infections.International journal of preventive medicine · 2018
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

H PiechotaKlinik für Urologie, Kinderurologie und Operative Uro-Onkologie, Johannes Wesling-Klinikum Minden, Universitätsklinikum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Hans Nolte Str. 1, 32429, Minden, Deutschland. hansjuergen.piechota@muehlenkreiskliniken.de.
Johannes Wesling Klinikum Minden · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Urinay tract infection (UTI) as one of the most frequent bacterial infections in humans is of utmost relevance. Because of the rising prevalence of antimicrobial resistance, urinalysis should always include urine culture and a resistogram in order to avoid an unspecific selection and overuse of antibiotics. Prevention of recurrent UTI must first of all rule out predisposing uropathogenic conditions. Nowadays, a great variety of drugs, behavioral, and supportive treatment options can effectively minimize UTI recurrence. The growing importance of vaccines (immunotherapy), probiotics (lactobacilli), and standardized herbal preparations meets the need of reducing antibiotic use and the development of antimicrobial resistance. Around 80% of all nosocomial UTIs (nUTIs) are associated with indwelling urinary catheters. It is estimated that up to 70% of all nUTIs occurring in Germany may be avoided by using appropriate preventative measures. Therefore, profound knowledge about the basics of catheter-associated nUTIs and the correct management of urinary catheters are of utmost individual and socioeconomic importance.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial VaccinesCatheter-Related InfectionsCross InfectionEvidence-Based MedicineHumansProbioticsRecurrenceSecondary PreventionTreatment OutcomeUrinary CathetersUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial VaccinesCatheterHerbal medicinesInfection, bacterialProbioticsVaccines

Identifiers

PMID28424831
OpenAlexW2606830109

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.