Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41055491›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical microbiology2025

The lingering legacy of one letter in antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

Saied Ali, Fidelma Fitzpatrick

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Saied AliDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Fidelma FitzpatrickDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For decades, the 'Intermediate' (I) category in antimicrobial susceptibility testing was frequently misinterpreted as indicative of therapeutic failure, rather than an opportunity for dose optimization. This misunderstanding shaped prescribing behaviour, antimicrobial trial design and guideline development. The 2019 European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing redefinition of the 'I' category as 'Susceptible, Increased Exposure' (SIE) highlighted the potential for treatment efficacy through dose adjustment, challenging entrenched prescribing behaviours and exposing limitations in historical trials, guidelines and surveillance practices. Antimicrobial stewardship that employs SIE-based strategies can preserve narrower-spectrum agents. However, the misapplication of 'I' can promote unnecessary broad-spectrum antimicrobial prescribing. Surveillance systems, clinical decision support and antimicrobial stewardship should be continuously updated to reflect current pharmacological principles and thereby enhance patient care outcomes.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaAntimicrobial StewardshipHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPractice Guidelines as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agentsantimicrobial stewardshipantimicrobial susceptibility testingdose optimizationEuropean Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST)intermediate categorysusceptible increased exposure

Identifiers

PMID41055491
PMCPMC12503386

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.