ArticleJournal of research in pharmacy practice
Sensitivity and Specificity of prior Methicillin-Resistant
Article in Journal of research in pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMethicillin-resistant
methodsA retrospective chart review of patients 18 years or older admitted to a large tertiary care hospital in the Midwest of the United States in 2016 who had a MRSA nasal swab performed and had an ICU admission stay of over 24 h was conducted. This group of patients was matched to a patient list of subjects who were admitted as an inpatient to the same ICU at least once during the following year. Data were collected on demographic and clinical information, as well as the results of MRSA swabs and the presence of a MRSA infection during both hospitalizations. Predictive values were calculated using 2 × 2 tables including sensitivity and specificity of a first MRSA swab result with a MRSA infection during the subsequent ICU stay.
findingsSeventy-seven patients were matched who had MRSA swabs performed on two separate ICU admissions. The negative predictive value of the first MRSA swab result on a MRSA infection during the second ICU stay was 96%.
conclusionIn this pilot study, a previous negative MRSA nasal swab may predict a lack of a MRSA infection in a subsequent infection during a 1-year period.
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.