ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Accuracy Analysis of the In Vitro Activity of Colistin Against Multidrug-Resistant (MDR) Non-Fermenters Using Broth Microdilution, Disk Elution, and Agar Dilution.
Article in Cureus, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesColistin is a crucial treatment approach for multidrug-resistant (MDR) gram-negative bacterial infections but its susceptibility testing is challenging for clinical laboratories. Therefore, the study was planned to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the colistin broth disk elution (CBDE) method and the colistin agar test (CAT) in determining colistin minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) among MDR non-fermenting gram-negative bacilli (NF-GNB). The performance of these methods is compared to the gold standard broth microdilution (BMD) technique, with the goal of identifying reliable, resource-feasible alternatives for routine clinical laboratory use. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 74 MDR non-fermenter isolates (37 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The diagnostic performance characteristics of CBDE and CAT were assessed by comparing them to the gold standard BMD. Agreement statistics, including categorical agreement (CA), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), were calculated. Kappa statistics with 95% CI were used to determine the level of agreement.
resultsCBDE and CAT showed CAs of 90.5% and 85.1%, respectively, with respect to BMD. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for CBDE, with reference to BMD, were 88.8%, 91.4%, 85.7%, and 93.4%, respectively, while for CAT, these were 88.8%, 82.9%, 75%, and 92.8%, respectively. Agreement statistics (kappa) for CBDE was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.56 to 1), and for CAT, it was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.46 to 0.97), both indicating substantial agreement. Species-wise stratified analyses for
conclusionVarious susceptibility testing methods for colistin give diverse results. CBDE can be used as an alternative to BMD for
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.