Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35146049›Full record

ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2022

Raising the Bar: Improving Antimicrobial Resistance Detection by Clinical Laboratories by Ensuring Use of Current Breakpoints.

Patricia J Simner, Carol A Rauch, Isabella W Martin, Kaede V Sullivan, Daniel Rhoads, Robin Rolf, Rosemary She, Rhona J Souers, Christina Wojewoda, Romney M Humphries

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. EAVLD 2024 - 7Italian journal of food safety · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Multidrug Resistance ofOpen forum infectious diseases · 2023
    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

10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Patricia J SimnerJohns Hopkins Medical Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Carol A RauchVanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Isabella W MartinDartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA.
Kaede V SullivanTemple University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Daniel RhoadsCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7636-5191
Robin RolfCollege of American Pathologists, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Rosemary SheUniversity of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Rhona J SouersCollege of American Pathologists, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Christina WojewodaUniversity of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington, Vermont, USA.
Romney M HumphriesVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6568-156X
College of American Pathologists · USCleveland Clinic · USDartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center · USTemple University Hospital · USUniversity of Southern California · USUniversity of Vermont Medical Center · USVanderbilt University · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a pressing global challenge detected by antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) performed by clinical laboratories. AST results are interpreted using clinical breakpoints, which are updated to enable accurate detection of new and emerging AMR. Laboratories that do not apply up-to-date breakpoints impede global efforts to address the AMR crisis, but the extent of this practice is poorly understood.

methodsA total of 1490 clinical laboratories participating in a College of American Pathologists proficiency testing survey for bacterial cultures were queried to determine use of obsolete breakpoints.

resultsBetween 37.9% and 70.5% of US laboratories reported using obsolete breakpoints for the antimicrobials that were queried. In contrast, only 17.7%-43.7% of international laboratories reported using obsolete breakpoints (

conclusionsThese data demonstrate a significant gap in the ability to detect AMR in the US, and to a lesser extent internationally. Improved application of current breakpoints by clinical laboratories will require combined action from regulatory agencies, laboratory accreditation groups, and device manufacturers.

Indexed as

antimicrobial resistancebreakpointslaboratory testingsusceptibility testing

Identifiers

PMID35146049
PMCPMC8826219
OpenAlexW4210926376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.