Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31591126›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2019

Comparative

Iris H Chen, James M Kidd, Kamilia Abdelraouf, David P Nicolau

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Infection and drug resistance · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Understanding the rationale and clinical impact of the revised CLSI 2024 minocycline susceptibility breakpoints against Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024
    Article
  5. Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. OvercomingOpen forum infectious diseases · 2022
    Review
  9. Cefiderocol: A New Cephalosporin Stratagem Against Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Antimicrobial Treatment Strategies forAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Iris H ChenCenter for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA.
James M KiddCenter for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA.
Kamilia AbdelraoufCenter for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA.
David P NicolauCenter for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA david.nicolau@hhchealth.org.
Hartford Financial Services (United States)Hartford Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cefiderocol is a novel siderophore cephalosporin that utilizes bacterial ferric iron transports to cross the outer membrane. Cefiderocol shows high stability against all classes of β-lactamases, rendering it extremely potent against carbapenem- and multidrug-resistant Gram-negative organisms. Using a neutropenic murine thigh model, we compared the efficacies of human-simulated exposures of cefiderocol (2 g Q8H 3 h infusion) and ceftazidime (2 g Q8H 2 h infusion) against

Identifiers

PMID31591126
PMCPMC6879223
OpenAlexW2978768960

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.