Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40012655›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2025

Methicillin-resistant

Joshua D Niforatos, Jeremiah S Hinson, Richard E Rothman, Sara E Cosgrove, Kate Dzintars, Eili Y Klein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Prevention and Treatment ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
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

6 authors.

Joshua D NiforatosDepartment of Emergency Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Jeremiah S HinsonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Richard E RothmanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Sara E CosgroveDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Kate DzintarsDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Eili Y KleinDepartment of Emergency Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Given the support for methicillin-resistant Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of all patients aged ≥ 18 years presenting to 5 emergency departments within a university-based health system who were given intravenous (IV) vancomycin during their ED index visit. The primary outcome assessed the proportion of patients with MRSA-positive blood cultures who received IV vancomycin in the ED. We also measured associations between clinical attributes associated with any MRSA infection. Results: Of the 20,212 unique ED visits for patients who received IV vancomycin, 63% (n = 12,755) had at least 1 MRSA risk factor. Only 2.4% (n = 494) and 14.1% (n = 2850) of patients receiving IV vancomycin in the ED were found to have MRSA bacteremia or any MRSA-positive culture, respectively. A total of 3160 patients met Sepsis-3 criteria and received IV vancomycin, though 65% (n = 2064) had no MRSA risk factors. For any patient with culture-proven MRSA, 63.8% (n = 315) and 43.4% (n = 1236) received an MRSA antimicrobial in the ED. MRSA risk factors were not associated with MRSA bacteremia (≥1 MRSA risk factor: odds ratio, 1.3, 95% CI, 0.9-1.8) or an MRSA-positive culture of any type (odds ratio, 0.9, 95% CI, 0.7-1.1). Conclusion: Within our hospital system, MRSA was an infrequent cause of bacteremia for patients presenting to the ED with sepsis or septic shock. Although vancomycin is frequently used in the ED, many patients with culture-proven MRSA did not receive MRSA antimicrobials. Notably, one-third of patients with culture-proven MRSA had no MRSA risk factors. MRSA risk factors were not predictive of culture-proven MRSA, thus highlighting the complexity of antimicrobial stewardship in the ED without validated clinical decision rules.

Indexed as

antibiotic prescribingclinical guidelinesclinical practice variationemergency medicineMRSA

Identifiers

PMID40012655
PMCPMC11853012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.