ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2024
Systematic scoping review of automated systems for the surveillance of healthcare-associated bloodstream infections related to intravascular catheters.
Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2024. 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.
- First results of a national deployment of a fully automated central-line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) surveillance system, Switzerland, 2022 to 2023.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2026Article
- The relationship between catheter-related bloodstream infection and multi-drug resistant bacteria: a five-year retrospective study.BMC infectious diseases · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIntravascular catheters are crucial devices in medical practice that increase the risk of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs), and related health-economic adverse outcomes. This scoping review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of published automated algorithms for surveillance of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) and central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI).
methodsWe performed a scoping review based on a systematic search of the literature in PubMed and EMBASE from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2021. Studies were included if they evaluated predictive performance of automated surveillance algorithms for CLABSI/CRBSI detection and used manually collected surveillance data as reference. We assessed the design of the automated systems, including the definitions used to develop algorithms (CLABSI versus CRBSI), the datasets and denominators used, and the algorithms evaluated in each of the studies.
resultsWe screened 586 studies based on title and abstract, and 99 were assessed based on full text. Nine studies were included in the scoping review. Most studies were monocentric (n = 5), and they identified CLABSI (n = 7) as an outcome. The majority of the studies used administrative and microbiological data (n = 9) and five studies included the presence of a vascular central line in their automated system. Six studies explained the denominator they selected, five of which chose central line-days. The most common rules and steps used in the algorithms were categorized as hospital-acquired rules, infection rules (infection versus contamination), deduplication, episode grouping, secondary BSI rules (secondary versus primary BSI), and catheter-associated rules.
conclusionThe automated surveillance systems that we identified were heterogeneous in terms of definitions, datasets and denominators used, with a combination of rules in each algorithm. Further guidelines and studies are needed to develop and implement algorithms to detect CLABSI/CRBSI, with standardized definitions, appropriate data sources and suitable denominators.
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.