Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36889354›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics2022

Claas Kirchhelle, Scott H Podolsky

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Claas KirchhelleUNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN, DUBLIN, IRELAND.
Scott H PodolskyHARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL, BOSTON, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite being acknowledged as a major global health challenge, growing levels of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in pathogenic and commensal organisms have proven an awkward fit for international health frameworks. This article surveys the history of attempts to coordinate international responses to AMR alongside the origins and evolution of the current international health regulations (IHR). It argues that AMR, which encompasses a vast range of microbial properties and ecological reservoirs, is an awkward fit for the 'organismal' philosophies that centre on the rapid control of individual pathogens that have characterised international policy-making since the 19th century.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsGlobal HealthDrug Resistance, BacterialHumansInternational Health RegulationsPoliticsAnti-Bacterial AgentsAMRAntibioticsInternational Health RegulationsPandemicsSanitary Conferences

Identifiers

PMID36889354
PMCPMC10009373

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read4
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.