ReviewJournal of clinical microbiology2025
Point-Counterpoint: Cascade reporting-useful tool to support antimicrobial stewardship, or dangerously misleading.
Review in Journal of clinical microbiology, 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.
- Network-based characterization of latent co-testing patterns in antimicrobial susceptibility testing.iScience · 2026Article
- Adaptation and performance evaluation of the French society of microbiology algorithm for detection of carbapenemase-producing enterobacterales using VITEK2 antibiotic susceptibility testing system.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 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
Addressing antimicrobial resistance requires multi-disciplinary action, including from the clinical laboratory. Cascade reporting of the antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) is a strategy used by some laboratories to nudge clinicians toward the use of more narrow-spectrum antimicrobials. Cascade reporting involves suppression of broader-spectrum antimicrobials if the narrower-spectrum first-line antimicrobials show in-vitro susceptibility. Studies have shown that cascade reporting can reduce use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials and reduce antimicrobial resistance rates. However, implementing cascade reporting can be complex, and some question the effectiveness on impacting long-term prescribing behaviors. Furthermore, there are concerns surrounding compliance and the possible negative impact on public health surveillance for antimicrobial resistance. In this article, experts weigh in on the benefits and risks associated with implementing AST cascade reporting. General consensus is that cascade reporting is a benefit to antimicrobial stewardship, but protocols need careful implementation to minimize risk to patients and public health.
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.