Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28702465›Full record

ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2017

A Dynamic Transmission Model to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Infection Control Strategies.

Karim Khader, Alun Thomas, W Charles Huskins, Molly Leecaster, Yue Zhang, Tom Greene, Andrew Redd, Matthew H Samore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Transmission Dynamics of Clostridioides difficile in 2 High-Acuity Hospital Units.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Extended models for nosocomial infection: parameter estimation and model selection.Mathematical medicine and biology : a journal of the IMA · 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

8 authors.

Karim KhaderInformatics, Decision Enhancement, and Analytical Sciences 2.0 Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, City, Utah.
Alun ThomasGenetic Epidemiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City.
W Charles HuskinsDivision of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Molly LeecasterInformatics, Decision Enhancement, and Analytical Sciences 2.0 Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, City, Utah.
Yue ZhangInformatics, Decision Enhancement, and Analytical Sciences 2.0 Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, City, Utah.
Tom GreeneInformatics, Decision Enhancement, and Analytical Sciences 2.0 Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, City, Utah.
Andrew ReddInformatics, Decision Enhancement, and Analytical Sciences 2.0 Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, City, Utah.
Matthew H SamoreInformatics, Decision Enhancement, and Analytical Sciences 2.0 Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, City, Utah.

Funding

University of Utah Center for Clinical and Translational Science-UL1UL1TR000105 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI MCCLAIN, DONALD A. · 2012 to 2013
$5.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe advancement of knowledge about control of antibiotic resistance depends on the rigorous evaluation of alternative intervention strategies. The STAR*ICU trial examined the effects of active surveillance and expanded barrier precautions on acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) in intensive care units. We report a reanalyses of the STAR*ICU trial using a Bayesian transmission modeling framework.

methodsThe data included admission and discharge times and surveillance test times and results. Markov chain Monte Carlo stochastic integration was used to estimate the transmission rate, importation, false negativity, and clearance separately for MRSA and VRE. The primary outcome was the intervention effect, which when less than (or greater than) zero, indicated a decreased (or increased) transmission rate attributable to the intervention.

resultsThe transmission rate increased in both arms from pre- to postintervention (by 20% and 26% for MRSA and VRE). The estimated intervention effect was 0.00 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.57 to 0.56) for MRSA and 0.05 (95% CI, -0.39 to 0.48) for VRE. Compared with MRSA, VRE had a higher transmission rate (preintervention, 0.0069 vs 0.0039; postintervention, 0.0087 vs 0.0046), higher importation probability (0.22 vs 0.17), and a lower clearance rate per colonized patient-day (0.016 vs 0.035).

conclusionsTransmission rates in the 2 treatment arms were statistically indistinguishable from the pre- to postintervention phase, consistent with the original analysis of the STAR*ICU trial. Our statistical framework was able to disentangle transmission from importation and account for imperfect testing. Epidemiological differences between VRE and MRSA were revealed.

Indexed as

dynamic transmission modelinfection controlrandomized control trial

Identifiers

PMID28702465
PMCPMC5499871

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.