Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40071214›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2025

Detection of antimicrobial resistance via state-of-the-art technologies versus conventional methods.

Ayman Elbehiry, Eman Marzouk, Adil Abalkhail, Moustafa H Abdelsalam, Mohamed E A Mostafa, Mazen Alasiri, Mai Ibrahem, Abousree T Ellethy, Abdulaziz Almuzaini, Sahar N Aljarallah and 4 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Point of care antimicrobial susceptibility testing.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Antibiotic resistance inFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

14 authors.

Ayman ElbehiryDepartment of Public Health, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia.
Eman MarzoukDepartment of Public Health, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia.
Adil AbalkhailDepartment of Public Health, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia.
Moustafa H AbdelsalamDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tabuk, Tabuk, Saudi Arabia.
Mohamed E A MostafaDepartment of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tabuk, Tabuk, Saudi Arabia.
Mazen AlasiriDepartment of Pharmacy, Armed Forces Hospital, King Abdul Aziz Naval base in Jubail, Jubail, Saudi Arabia.
Mai IbrahemDepartment of Public Health, College of Applied Medical Science, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Abousree T EllethyDivision of Biochemistry, Department of Basic Oral Sciences and Dental Education, College of Dentistry, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulaziz AlmuzainiDepartment of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia.
Sahar N AljarallahDepartment of Pharmacy sciences, College of Pharmacy, AlMaarefa University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Akram Abu-OkailDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Diagnosis, College of Veterinary Medicine, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia.
Naif MarzookDepartment of Emergency Medicine, King Fahad Armed Forces Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Satam AlhadyanDepartment of Environmental Health Administration, Health Services, Ministry of Defense, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Husam M EdreesDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tabuk, Tabuk, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is recognized as one of the foremost global health challenges, complicating the treatment of infectious diseases and contributing to increased morbidity and mortality rates. Traditionally, microbiological culture and susceptibility testing methods, such as disk diffusion and minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) assays, have been employed to identify AMR bacteria. However, these conventional techniques are often labor intensive and time consuming and lack the requisite sensitivity for the early detection of resistance. Recent advancements in molecular and genomic technologies-such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS), lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs), PCR-based diagnostic methods, and CRISPR-based diagnostics-have revolutionized the diagnosis of AMR. These innovative approaches provide increased sensitivity, reduced turnaround times, and the ability to identify genetic resistance mechanisms. This review seeks to examine the advantages and disadvantages of both emerging technologies and traditional methods for detecting AMR, emphasizing the potential benefits and limitations inherent to each. By understanding the strengths and limitations of these technologies, stakeholders, including researchers, healthcare professionals, regulatory agencies, health authorities, financial managers, and patients, can make informed decisions aimed at preventing the emergence and dissemination of antibiotic-resistant strains, thereby ultimately increasing patient safety.

Indexed as

antibiotic resistancecontemporary technologiesdetectiongenomicsmicrobial community

Identifiers

PMID40071214
PMCPMC11893576

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.