Comparison between cefepime and carbapenem therapy for deep-seated AmpC-producing

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Cefepime susceptibility testing in AmpC-hyperproducing Enterobacter cloacae complex: limitations of routine methods and a pragmatic diagnostic approach.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
   Article
2. Real-world validation of a reduced-dose continuous infusion cefepime regimen: pharmacodynamic target attainment, efficacy and neurotoxicity.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2026
   Observational
3. Questions regarding mortality and infection source in deep-seated infections.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026
   Article
4. Reply to Nishimura, "Questions regarding mortality and infection source in deep-seated infections".Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as