ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2022
Evaluation of the EUCAST Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test for
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Direct rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) from positive blood cultures: Recent advances, challenges, and future directions.Practical laboratory medicine · 2026Review
- Susceptibility Trends of Enterobacterales Isolated from Blood Culture Samples: A Four-Year Analysis with the Rise of Carbapenem Resistance.Infectious diseases & clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Optimizing bloodstream infection diagnosis: Implementation of the EUCAST Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (RAST) with automated digital imaging.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of three rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods directly from positive blood cultures integrated with rapid pathogen identification.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Complementary mNGS and traditional testing for bloodstream infections.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2026Review
- Distribution and Antimicrobial Resistance Trends of Bloodstream Bacterial Isolates: A 10-year Single-Center Study in China.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Evaluation of EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) for carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae with focus on KPC variants.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of EUCAST Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Gram-Negative Bacteria Directly from Positive Blood Cultures.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Multicentre Evaluation of the EUCAST Rapid Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (RAST) Extending Analysis to 16-20 Hours Reading Time.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Bloodstream infection (BSI) is defined by the presence of microbes in the bloodstream and has high mortality. Early antimicrobial therapy is key to treating BSI patients. Because of potential antimicrobial resistance, rapid evaluation for the most suitable antimicrobial therapy is important for appropriate treatment. In China, the current workflow of microbiological diagnosis in BSI involves blood culture, species identification, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, which takes around 3 days. However, this delay could lead to worse symptoms. To rapidly and accurately assess antimicrobial susceptibility, in this study, we applied EUCAST rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (RAST) to determine the antimicrobial susceptibilities of the most frequently detected
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.