ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2025
Defining and responding to the contextual drivers for implementation of antimicrobial stewardship in 14 neonatal units in South Africa.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2025. 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.
- Antimicrobial stewardship in LMICs: from paper promises to purpose-driven people.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026Article
- Multilevel barriers to antimicrobial stewardship in tertiary care hospitals: A comparative systematic scoping review of high-income versus low-/middle-income countries evidence mapped by study design and healthcare professionals.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
40 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Research on the contextual drivers of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programme interventions in neonatal units is limited. Methods: As part of a prospective mixed-methods multidisciplinary neonatal AMS (NeoAMS) interventional study in 14 South African hospitals, we applied a three-phased process to assess implementation barriers and contextual drivers experienced by participating health professionals. The study included: (Phase one; P1) a survey of pre-intervention barriers and enablers; (P2) written feedback during the study intervention phase; and (P3) semi-structured exit interviews. Results: Respondents to the P1 survey ( Conclusions: Understanding the organizational and interprofessional context for NeoAMS implementation enabled an MDT approach to develop and optimize neonatal AMS with potential for adoption in similar resource-constrained settings.
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.