ArticleIranian journal of microbiology2022
Evaluation of chromogenic agar medium, can it be a suitable alternative to conventional culture system for identification of uropathogens?
Article in Iranian journal of microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparison of chromogenic and cysteine lactose electrolyte deficient agar for identification of uropathogens in Gujarat, India.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Urinary tract infections (UTI) account for major proportion of outpatient load and hospital admission globally. In most of the clinical microbiology laboratories MacConkey agar (MAC) and Cystine lactose electrolyte-deficient (CLED) agar are being used for identification of uropathogens. The main objective of the present study was to evaluate the usefulness of HiCrome Materials and Methods: This study was conducted over a period of three months on 672 non-duplicate midstream and/or catheter-catch urine samples. All samples were inoculated on to HiCrome Results: Among the 672 samples received for culture, 113 (16.8%) showed significant growth. Among the 672 samples, 95 (14.1%) showed growth of a single organism while 18 (2.7%) showed polymicrobial growth. The rate of isolation and presumptive identification of the isolates and polymicrobial growth was found significantly higher on HiCrome Conclusion: HiCrome
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.