Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31276536›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Quantifying uncertainty about future antimicrobial resistance: Comparing structured expert judgment and statistical forecasting methods.

Abigail R Colson, Itamar Megiddo, Gerardo Alvarez-Uria, Sumanth Gandra, Tim Bedford, Alec Morton, Roger M Cooke, Ramanan Laxminarayan

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Resistance Patterns inTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Antimicrobial Resistance inAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  9. 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 at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Abigail R ColsonDepartment of Management Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3241-5855
Itamar MegiddoDepartment of Management Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8391-6660
Gerardo Alvarez-UriaDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Rural Development Trust Hospital, Bathalapalli, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Sumanth GandraDepartment of Management Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Tim BedfordDepartment of Management Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Alec MortonDepartment of Management Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Roger M CookeResources for the Future, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Ramanan LaxminarayanDepartment of Management Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy · USUniversity of Strathclyde · GBMedical Trust Hospital · INResources For The Future · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increase of multidrug resistance and resistance to last-line antibiotics is a major global public health threat. Although surveillance programs provide useful current and historical information on the scale of the problem, the future emergence and spread of antibiotic resistance is uncertain, and quantifying this uncertainty is crucial for guiding decisions about investment in antibiotics and resistance control strategies. Mathematical and statistical models capable of projecting future rates are challenged by the paucity of data and the complexity of the emergence and spread of resistance, but experts have relevant knowledge. We use the Classical Model of structured expert judgment to elicit projections with uncertainty bounds of resistance rates through 2026 for nine pathogen-antibiotic pairs in four European countries and empirically validate the assessments against data on a set of calibration questions. The performance-weighted combination of experts in France, Spain, and the United Kingdom projected that resistance for five pairs on the World Health Organization's priority pathogens list (E. coli and K. pneumoniae resistant to third-generation cephalosporins and carbapenems and MRSA) would remain below 50% in 2026. In Italy, although upper bounds of 90% credible ranges exceed 50% resistance for some pairs, the medians suggest Italy will sustain or improve its current rates. We compare these expert projections to statistical forecasts based on historical data from the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (EARS-Net). Results from the statistical models differ from each other and from the judgmental forecasts in many cases. The judgmental forecasts include information from the experts about the impact of current and future shifts in infection control, antibiotic usage, and other factors that cannot be easily captured in statistical forecasts, demonstrating the potential of structured expert judgment as a tool for better understanding the uncertainty about future antibiotic resistance.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaDrug Resistance, BacterialEuropeExpert TestimonyForecastingFranceHumansItalyJudgmentMicrobial Sensitivity TestsModels, StatisticalSpainUncertaintyUnited KingdomAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID31276536
PMCPMC6611586
OpenAlexW2955072202

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.