ReviewJAC-antimicrobial resistance2023
Optimizing patient recruitment into clinical trials of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens.
Review in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Review of Fluoroquinolones with a Focus on Veterinary-Approved Agents.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Integrating machine learning and artificial intelligence in the management of Acinetobacter infections: a narrative review.Infection · 2026Review
- Practical vs Recent Clinical Trial Use Of Dalbavancin.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Real-World Evidence and Multidrug Resistant Infections: How Can We Leverage RWE to Improve Patient Outcome with the Novel Beta-Lactam and Beta-Lactam/Beta-Lactamase Inhibitor Combinations.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recruitment of patients with critical priority antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) bacteria into drug approval randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has not been successful to date. Approaching from the viewpoint of clinician-investigators and learning from the experience of AMR-focused investigator-initiated trials, we present suggestions to improve feasibility and efficiency of RCTs evaluating patients with severe infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative or other AMR bacteria. Considerations address the trials' eligibility criteria, whether the focus of the trial is pathogen- or syndrome-targeted, trials' case report forms and monitoring, informed consent strategies for the recruitment of extremely ill patients, team dedication and incentives to run the trial and alternative trial designs. Evidence on the effects of new drugs against the AMR that these drugs target is weak and needs to be improved through better industry-academic collaboration, taking advantage of the different strengths of industry-led and investigator-initiated research.
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.