Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39011836›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2024

Cultivating global antimicrobial stewardship: linguistic and cultural validation of the Australian National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey appropriateness assessment definitions for Portugal.

C Palos, C Ierano, M J D Santos, I Leitão, P Nogueira, R James, J A Paiva, K Thursky, P Sousa

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

C PalosNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre; Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, REAL, CCAL, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-9375-4623
C IeranoNational Centre for Antimicrobial Stewardship, Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
M J D SantosISCTE-Instituto Universitário de Lisboa, Centro de Investigação e Estudos de Sociologia, Lisbon, Portugal.
I LeitãoUnidade Local PPCIRA, Hospital Beatriz Ângelo, Clínica Universitária de Doenças Infeciosas e Parasitárias, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
P NogueiraNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre; Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, REAL, CCAL, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
R JamesNational Centre for Antimicrobial Stewardship, Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1425-029X
J A PaivaIntensive Care Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de São João, Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
K ThurskyNational Centre for Antimicrobial Stewardship, Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
P SousaNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre; Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, REAL, CCAL, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.

Funding

Fundação Ciência e TecnologiaNOVA-Comprehensive Health Research Centre
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntimicrobial resistance is driven by inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing. The National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (NAPS) is an Australian-developed auditing platform to assist in the assessments of antimicrobial quality by antimicrobial stewardship programmes using consensus-based definitions. The NAPS has demonstrated to be transferable to other countries. Its adaptation to Portugal could improve knowledge about the quality of antimicrobial prescribing in the country.

objectivesTo translate, culturally adapt, and validate the Australian Hospital NAPS appropriateness assessment definitions of antimicrobial prescribing for Portugal.

methodsInternational recommendations on translation and adaptation of instruments were followed. Two panels of experts participated in the process, using Zoom® for discussions and interviews, and Google Forms® for assessing vignettes. A native English-speaking person proficient in Portuguese conducted the back-translation. SPSS v.28 and Excel® were used for validity calculation.

resultsThe Portuguese version was well accepted, its implementation being perceived as desirable and feasible by the experts. Validation process showed a Fleiss' κ score of 0.483 (95% CI, 0.415-0.551, P < 0.005) for appropriateness, and an average agreement with the Australian NAPS team of 0.8 and 0.9, respectively, for appropriateness and reasons for inappropriateness.

conclusionsThe Portuguese version of the Australian Hospital NAPS appropriateness assessment definitions of antimicrobial prescribing, the first to be translated from English, was deemed non-inferior to the original, was well accepted, considered to be desirable and feasible, and could inspire other countries, particularly other Portuguese-speaking countries, to adapt and validate them in their own contexts, reinforcing the possibility of transferring NAPS use beyond Australia.

Indexed as

Antimicrobial StewardshipAnti-Bacterial AgentsAustraliaDrug PrescriptionsHumansInappropriate PrescribingPortugalPractice Patterns, Physicians'Surveys and QuestionnairesTranslationsAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID39011836
PMCPMC11368428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.