ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2019
Evaluation of manual and electronic healthcare-associated infections surveillance: a multi-center study with 21 tertiary general hospitals in China.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The informatics pathway for hospital infection quality control monitoring.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Development of a knowledge-based healthcare-associated infections surveillance system in China.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Process analysis of the patient pathway for automated data collection: an exemplar using pituitary surgery.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Investigating healthcare worker mobility and patient contacts within a UK hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic.Communications medicine · 2022Article
- An interventional implementation project: hand hygiene improvement.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are still a major health threats worldwide. Traditional surveillance methods involving manual surveillance by infection control practitioners (ICPs) for data collection processes are laborious, inefficient, and generate data of variable quality. In this study, we sought to evaluate the impact of surveillance and interaction platform system (SIPS) for HAIs surveillance compared to manual survey in tertiary general hospitals.
methodsA large multi-center study including 21 tertiary general hospitals and 63 wards were performed to evaluate the impact of electronic SIPS for HAIs.
resultsWe collected 4,098 consecutive patients and found that the hospitals installed with SIPS significantly increased work efficiency of ICPs achieving satisfactory diagnostic performance of HAIs with 0.73 for sensitivity, 0.81 for specificity and 0.81 area under the curve (AUC). However, there were significant heterogeneity own to regions, time of SIPS installation, departments and sample size.
conclusionsSIPS significantly improved ICPs efficiency and HAIs monitoring effectiveness, but there were shortcomings such as untimely maintenance and high cost.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.