Catheter-associated bloodstream infection rates: how low can you go?

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. How can we discover the most valuable types of big data and artificial intelligence-based solutions? A methodology for the efficient development of the underlying analytics that improve care.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021
   Article
2. Deterioration in hygiene behavior among fifth-year medical students during the placement of intravenous catheters: a prospective cohort comparison of practical skills.BMC medical education · 2021
   Article
3. Vascular access for renal replacement therapy among 459 critically ill patients: a pragmatic analysis of the randomized AKIKI trial.Annals of intensive care · 2021
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Sustained reduction of catheter-associated bloodstream infections with enhancement of catheter bundle by chlorhexidine dressings over 11 years.2019

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as