Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30930604›Full record

ArticleP & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management2019

A Guide to Bacterial Culture Identification And Results Interpretation.

Christopher Giuliano, Chandni R Patel, Pramodini B Kale-Pradhan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

3 authors.

Christopher Giuliano
Chandni R Patel
Pramodini B Kale-Pradhan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo provide a guide to interpreting bacterial culture results.

methodsStudies were identified via a PubMed literature search (from 1966 to January 2018). Search terms included microbial sensitivity tests, microbial drug resistance, and anti-infective agents/pharmacology. Articles were included if they were published in English. References within identified articles were also reviewed.

resultsThis paper reviewed core concepts of interpreting bacterial culture results, including timing of cultures, common culture sites, potential for contamination, interpreting the Gram stain, role of rapid diagnostic tests, conventional antibiotic susceptibility testing, and automated testing.

conclusionThis guide can assist pharmacists in their role as integral members of the antimicrobial stewardship team in an effort to improve patient care.

Indexed as

anti-infective agents/pharmacologymicrobial drug resistancemicrobial sensitivity testspharmacokinetics

Identifiers

PMID30930604
PMCPMC6428495

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.