ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2020
Routine laboratory surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in community-acquired urinary tract infections adequately informs prescribing policy in England.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Global prevalence of nitrofurantoin-resistant uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) in humans: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025Pooled it
- Point-of-care tests for urinary tract infections to reduce antimicrobial resistance: a systematic review and conceptual economic model.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Pooled it
- The evidence landscape for direct-from-urine antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) for urinary tract infection (UTI): a scoping review.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Review
- Escherichia coli antimicrobial resistance in acute urinary tract infection lower than reported in Dutch national surveillance database.PloS one · 2025Observational
- Nitrofuran Derivatives Cross-Resistance Evidence-UropathogenicJournal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess whether resistance estimates obtained from sentinel surveillance for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in community-acquired urinary tract infections (UTIs) differ from routinely collected laboratory community UTI data.
methodsAll patients aged ≥18
resultsSentinel practices submitted 740 eligible specimens. The specimen submission rate had increased by 28 specimens per 1000 population per year (95% CI 21-35). Uropathogens were isolated from 23% (169/740) of specimens; 67% were
conclusionsRoutine laboratory data resulted in a small overestimation in resistance (although the difference was not statistically significant) and our findings suggest that it provides an adequate estimate of non-susceptibility to key antimicrobials in community-acquired UTIs in England. This study does not support the need for ongoing local sentinel surveillance.
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.