ArticleBMJ open2023
Antimicrobial resistance in topical treatments for microbial keratitis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of biofilm formation in fungal corneal ulcers on treatment outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of medical microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- Recent Nanotechnological Trends in the Management of Microbial Keratitis.Journal of ophthalmic & vision research · 2024Review
- Identifying important questions for Cochrane systematic reviews in Eyes and Vision: Report of a priority setting exercise.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThere is evidence for increased resistance against the antimicrobials used to treat keratitis. This review aims to provide global and regional prevalence estimates of antimicrobial resistance in corneal isolates and the range of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) with their associated resistance breakpoints. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We report this protocol following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. We will conduct an electronic bibliographic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies will report in any language data for the resistance or MIC for antimicrobials against bacterial, fungal or amoebic organisms isolated from suspected microbial keratitis. Studies that only report on viral keratitis will not be included. There will be no time restrictions on the date of publication. Screening for eligible studies, assessment of risk of bias and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, using predefined inclusion criteria and prepiloted data extraction forms. We will resolve disagreements between the reviewers by discussion and, if required, a third (senior) reviewer will arbitrate. We will assess the risk of bias using a tool validated in prevalence studies. The certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Pooled proportion estimates will be calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I ETHICS APPROVAL AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as this is a protocol for a systematic review of published data. The findings of this review will be published in an open-access, peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023331126.
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.