ReviewHealth science reports2025
Encoding Genes of Metallo β-Lactamases (
Review in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response to Commentary On: Encoding Genes of Metallo-β-Lactamases (Health science reports · 2025Article
- Comment On: Encoding Genes of Metallo‑β‑Lactamases (IMP, NDM, and VIM) inHealth science reports · 2025Article
- Nationwide Burden of Metallo-β-Lactamase Genes in Brazilian ClinicalAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Antimicrobial resistance is one of the top 10 global public health threats, particularly growing resistance to β-lactam antibiotics, including carbapenems, which are among the last-resort antibiotics used against multidrug and extensively drug-resistant bacteria. Methods: This meta-analysis explores the status of class B carbapenemases, including Imipenemase ( Results: The study selection process yielded 2517 studies. A total of 124 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria; of these, 25 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. A meta-analysis of prevalence studies demonstrated that the most encoding genes of MBLs were to NDM, VIM, and IMP at 7.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.9%-10.3%), 1.9% (95% CI: 0.9%-4.1%), and 0.9% (95% CI: 0.4%-2.0%), with heterogeneity (I-squared [ Conclusion: The increasing prevalence of
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.