Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31516534›Full record

ReviewDrugs in context2019

Challenges and research priorities to progress the impact of antimicrobial stewardship.

Matteo Bassetti, Daniele Roberto Giacobbe, Antonio Vena, Adrian Brink

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs in context, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. FromFrontiers in medicine · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Reducing dissemination of carbapenem-resistantAnnals of translational medicine · 2019
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Matteo BassettiInfectious Diseases Clinic, Department of Medicine, University of Udine, Italy.
Daniele Roberto GiacobbeInfectious Diseases Unit, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino - IRCCS per l'Oncologia, University of Genoa, Largo R. Benzi, 10, 16132, Genoa, Italy.
Antonio VenaInfectious Diseases Clinic, Department of Medicine, University of Udine, Italy.
Adrian BrinkDivision of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial stewardship programmes have been playing an important role in patient care and hospital policies. These programmes are now recognised as formal strategies for curbing the upward trend in antibiotic resistance and for improving the appropriate antimicrobial and antifungal use. The role of such programs in the era of antimicrobial resistance presents several unique challenges and opportunities, most notably in the diagnostic and therapeutic setting. Controversies remain regarding the most effective interventions and the appropriate design to evaluate their impact. In this review, based on rounds of discussion, we explain the most important challenges faced by antibiotic stewardship and antifungal stewardship programmes. We also try to suggest areas for further research.

Indexed as

AMRAMSantifungal stewardshipantimicrobial resistanceantimicrobial stewardship

Identifiers

PMID31516534
PMCPMC6726362

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.