ArticleInfection and drug resistance2022
Study on the Detection and Infection Distribution of Multidrug-Resistant Organisms in Different Specimens.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Innovative Solutions for Multidrug-Resistant Organisms' Infections in Intensive Care Unit: A Joint Efficacy Evaluation of Multidisciplinary Team and SHEL (Software, Hardware, Environment, Liveware) Model.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2025Article
- Implications of deduplication on the detection rates of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) in various specimens: insights from the hospital infection surveillance program.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2024Article
- Early and rapid diagnosis ofFrontiers in medicine · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To analyze the infection and distribution of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) in different clinical specimens, thereby providing a reference for clinical diagnosis and treatment and prevention and control. Patient and Methods: 2314 strains of MDRO isolated from clinical specimens in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from January to December 2020. MDRO were collected by Information System. The detection rate of MDRO, infection rate, the proportion of infection, and detection rate of MDRO infection in different specimens were analyzed. Results: The top three specimens in the detection rate of MDRO were BALF (60.71%), sputum (33.68%), and blood (28.79%). The top three specimens in the proportion of MDRO infection were blood (97.74), other sterile body fluids (90.35%), and BALF (90.20%). The top three specimens in the MDRO infection rate were BALF (9.75%), sputum (3.07%), and secretions (2.90%). The top three specimens in the detection rate of MDRO infection were sputum (0.63‰), other sterile body fluids (0.13‰), and secretions (0.11‰). Conclusion: The detection and infection distribution of MDRO vary greatly in different specimens. The submission of sterile body fluids for examination should be strengthened and the standard of sample collection should be highlighted.
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.