ArticleIranian journal of microbiology2018
"Is our choice of empirical antibiotics appropriate for patients with methicillin resistant
Article in Iranian journal of microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methicillin-ResistantPakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- A Single-Center Retrospective Study on the Bacteriological Profile of Breast Abscesses.Cureus · 2025Article
- Bacteriological characteristics of primary breast abscesses in patients from the community in the era of microbial resistance.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2024Article
- Breaking the Barrier: A Study on Multi-drug Resistance in Breast Abscess at an Academic Malaysian Hospital.World journal of surgery · 2023Article
- Risk factors and prognosis of acute lactation mastitis developing into a breast abscess: A retrospective longitudinal study in China.PloS one · 2022Article
- Clinical characteristics of lactational breast abscess caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: hospital-based study in China.International breastfeeding journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesBreast abscesses remain as one of the most common reasons for females to come for a surgical consult. This retrospective cohort study includes both lactating and non-lactating females with breast abscesses. Due to changing trends in bacteriology of organisms, we need to reconsider our empirical choices of antibiotics. In our study, the main causative organism in breast abscess was MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is an analytical review of all breast abscesses treated in a single center from 2012 to 2015. This study included bacterial cultures, antibiotic sensitivities and resistance pattern in breast abscesses.
results268 patients were included in the study. 143 (53.4%) were Lactational abscesses and 125 (46.6%) were non-Lactational abscesses. 169 (63.0%) harbored
conclusionMRSA was the most common organism seen in breast abscesses. Our first line treatment of antibiotics was resistant. Clindamycin and ciprofloxacin should be the preferred 1
Indexed as
Identifiers
30873261PMC6414740W2921052197What 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.