ArticleThe Pan African medical journal2017
Assessment of methicillin resistant
Article in The Pan African medical journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proportion and antibiogram of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2026Pooled it
- The effect of novel β-lactam derivatives synthesized from substituted phenethylamines on resistance genes of MRSA isolates.The Journal of antibiotics · 2024Article
- A cross-sectional study on the prevalence and drug susceptibility pattern of methicillin-resistantThe Pan African medical journal · 2023Article
- Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolated from raw milk and nasal swabs of small ruminants in Abeokuta, Nigeria.Tropical animal health and production · 2020Article
- Methicillin-ResistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe heterogeneous expression of methicillin resistance in
methodsThis is an analytical comparative study conducted among sudanese patients during period from May 2012 to July 2014,
resultsMRSA- latex agglutination was the most accurate test; it showed 100% of both sensitivity and specificity, followed by cefoxitin disc with sensitivity of 98.48% and specificity of 100%. However, both of oxacillin disc and oxacillin resistance screen agar base showed less accurate results, and were affected by incubation periods. Oxacillin disc after 24 h incubation both at 30°C and 35°C showed sensitivity and specificity values of 87.88% and 96.23%, respectively. However, after 48h incubation the test at 30°C showed sensitivity and specificity values of 89.39%, and 94.34%, respectively. At 35°C (48h) it showed values of 89.39%, 92.45% respectively. Specificity of ORSAB was more than oxacillin disc at 35°C after 24h incubation 98.11% and 96.23%, respectively.
conclusionMRSA- latex agglutination and cefoxitin disc diffusion tests are recommended for routine detection of MRSA.
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.