Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32099313›Full record

ReviewClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2020

Treatment-Resistant Bacterial Keratitis: Challenges and Solutions.

Sait Egrilmez, Şeyda Yildirim-Theveny

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 115 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Microbial keratitis in the age of resistance: unlocking the therapeutic potential of phage therapy.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Contact Lens-AssociatedClinical optometry · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Evaluation ofCurrent drug delivery · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sait EgrilmezPrivate Office, Izmir, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-6971-527X
Şeyda Yildirim-ThevenyAdiyaman University, Training and Research Hospital, Adiyaman, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-1473-9001
Adıyaman University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial keratitis is an important ophthalmic emergency and one of the most common causes of corneal blindness. The main causes of treatment resistance in bacterial keratitis are failure to eliminate predisposing factors, misdiagnosis and mistreatment. At first, exogenous, local and systemic predisposing factors that disturbing ocular surface must be eliminated to improve corneal ulcers and to prevent recurrences. Smears and scrapings for staining and culture are indispensable diagnostic tools for cases of sight-threatening keratitis (centrally located, multifocal, characterized by melting, painful). Main treatment agents in bacterial keratitis treatment are topical antibiotics. Until the results of culture antibiograms reach the ophthalmologist, empirical antibiotic selections based on direct microscopic examination and gram stain findings are the most appropriate initial treatment approach currently.

Indexed as

antibiotic resistancebacterial keratitiscorneal crosslinkingmultidrug resistant

Identifiers

PMID32099313
PMCPMC6996220
OpenAlexW3003565719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.