ArticleInfection and drug resistance2022
Evaluation of the Negative Predictive Value of Methicillin-Resistant
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Impact of Universal Mupirocin Decolonization in Intensive Care Units on the Utility of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Polymerase Chain Reaction Nasal Swab Testing.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Swab Testing to Optimize Pneumonia treatment with empiric Vancomycin (STOP-Vanc): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Research square · 2024Article
- Molecular diagnostics for genotypic detection of antibiotic resistance: current landscape and future directions.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2023Review
- Antimicrobial Stewardship Techniques for Critically Ill Patients with Pneumonia.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In addition to active surveillance of methicillin-resistant Materials and Methods: This retrospective study enrolled patients who received glycopeptides in the MICU of a medical center in 2019. Patients treated with glycopeptides for over 2 days before MICU admission were excluded. The associated data were collected through the electronic medical record system. The negative predictive value (NPV) of MRSA nasal swabs for MRSA infection was calculated, and their influence on empirical glycopeptide treatment duration was analyzed. Results: Of the 338 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 277 underwent MRSA nasal screening. The NPV of MRSA-negative nasal swab for subsequent MRSA infection was 98.4%. The glycopeptide treatment duration of the patients with and without nasal screening was not significantly different (4.2 ± 2.8 vs 4.4 ± 3.0 days, Conclusion: The MRSA nasal swabs have high NPV for MRSA infection in critically ill patients. However, it has no impact on the empirical glycopeptide treatment duration. The value of MRSA nasal swabs should be advocated to optimize antibiotic therapy.
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.