ArticleTzu chi medical journal
Factors affecting vancomycin-resistant
Article in Tzu chi medical journal. 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.
- A validated prediction model for intestinal vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus colonization in critically ill patients with sepsis: insights into risk stratification and clinical impact.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Unveiling the impact: COVID-19's influence on bacterial resistance in the Kingdom of Bahrain.World journal of virology · 2025Article
- Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci: Current Understandings of Resistance in Relation to Transmission and Preventive Strategies.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
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
Objectives: The prevalence of vancomycin-resistant Materials and Methods: Between 2014 and 2019, there were 3188 VRE-positive cultures reported at our institution, as per the electronic medical records system. Results: In the medical and surgical wards, patients who received penicillin (odds ratios [ORs]: 2.84 and 4.16, respectively) and third-generation cephalosporins (ORs: 3.17 and 6.19, respectively) were at higher risk of VRE colonization. In intensive care units, the use of carbapenems (OR: 2.08) was the most significant variable. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the risk factors for VRE colonization differed between wards. Thus, policies should be established according to the attributes of patients in each ward, and active screening tests should be performed according to individual risks, instead of a policy for comprehensive mass screening.
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.