ArticlePloS one2025
Resistance trend in bacteria isolated from corneal ulcers: A retrospective analysis from Pakistan.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- RefractoryCase reports in ophthalmological medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to isolate and characterize bacteria from corneal ulcers and screen them for multiple antibiotic resistance, contributing to understanding patterns of resistance and identifying effective treatment strategies.
designA retrospective study was conducted between January 2024 to August 2024. SUBJECTS, PARTICIPANTS AND/OR CONTROLS: The study involved the isolation of pathogenic bacterial strains from 15 corneal ulcer samples. METHODS, INTERVENTION, OR TESTING: We isolated and characterized bacterial strains from corneal ulcer samples, which were routinely collected at an ophthalmology clinic for suspected infectious corneal ulcers and examined their resistance to twenty-six routinely prescribed antibiotics. The bacterial species included methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Pseudomonas aeruginosa and E. coli among others. Antibiotic resistance patterns were assessed, with a focus on commonly used antibiotics such as ciprofloxacin, gentamycin, and vancomycin.
main outcome measuresThe study measured the healing rates of corneal ulcer patients, antibiotic resistance levels across bacterial strains, and specific treatment responses to various antibiotics.
resultsThirteen out of fifteen corneal ulcer patients healed completely, while two patients developed full corneal opacity due to infection with P. aeruginosa. Significant differences in resistance were observed among the bacterial strains. MRSA exhibited the highest resistance levels, particularly to multiple antibiotics. Ciprofloxacin and gentamycin were less effective against the isolated strains, while vancomycin showed reduced resistance, against Gram-positive bacteria. Both ciprofloxacin and co-trimoxazole exhibited strong connections with multiple bacterial strains, indicating high resistance.
conclusionThis study underscores the need for ongoing surveillance of antibiotic resistance patterns to guide treatment approaches and slow the spread of resistant bacteria. It also highlights the importance of developing new antibiotics and alternative therapies, with an emphasis on understanding the molecular mechanisms behind resistance to combat the global health posed by antibiotic-resistant infections.
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.