ArticlePloS one2021
Molecular characteristics and risk factor analysis of Staphylococcus aureus colonization put insight into CC1 colonization in three nursing homes in Shanghai.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence, Antimicrobial Resistance, and Molecular Characteristics of MRSA in Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Study.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Article
- Genome-wide comparative analysis of CC1 Staphylococcus aureus between colonization and infection.European journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Characteristics of Virulent ST5-SCCInfection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- Molecular typing and characterization ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- A 10-year retrospective study of methicillin-resistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research indicates that Staphylococcus aureus colonization in the elderly with predisposing risks is associated with subsequent infection. However, the molecular epidemiology and risk factors for S. aureus colonization among residents and staff in nursing homes (NHs) in China remain unclear. A multicenter study was conducted in three NHs in Shanghai between September 2019 and October 2019. We explored the prevalence, molecular epidemiology, and risk factors for S. aureus colonization. All S. aureus isolates were characterized based on antimicrobial resistance, virulence genes, multilocus sequence typing (MLST), staphylococcus protein A (spa) typing, and staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec) typing. NH records were examined for potential risk factors for S. aureus colonization. S. aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) isolates were detected in 109 (100 residents and 9 staff, 19.8%, 109/551) and 28 (24 residents and 4 staff, 5.1%, 28/551) subjects among 496 residents and 55 staff screened, respectively. Compared to methicillin-susceptible S. aureus isolates, all 30 MRSA isolates had higher resistance rates to most antibiotics except minocycline, rifampicin, linezolid, vancomycin, and teicoplanin. Sequence type (ST) 1 (21.3%) was the most common sequence type, and t127 (20.5%) was the most common spa type among 122 S. aureus isolates. SCCmec type I (70%) was the dominant clone among all MRSA isolates. CC1 (26/122, 21.3%) was the predominant complex clone (CC), followed by CC398 (25/122, 20.5%), CC5 (20/122, 16.4%) and CC188 (18/122, 14.8%). Female sex (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.04-2.79; P = 0.036) and invasive devices (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.26-3.81; P = 0.006) were independently associated with S. aureus colonization.
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.