ArticleCureus2025
A Comparative Study of Standard and Direct Susceptibility Testing From Positive Blood Cultures at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Bangladesh.
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.
- Rapid microbiological diagnostics for sepsis in critical care: integrating technological advances with antimicrobial stewardship.Acute and critical care · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSepsis is one of the leading causes of death globally. Standard antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) takes around 48 hours to get results from a positive blood culture bottle. Advanced diagnostic tools for AST are not available in most of the laboratories in developing countries. Therefore, performing a direct susceptibility testing (DST) might help to reduce turnaround time by 24 hours, reducing high mortality in patients with septicemia.
objectiveThe study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of DST from positive blood culture broth by comparing categorical agreement and errors against the standard AST of the isolates.
methodsBlood culture bottles flagged as positive by the automated system between January 2024 and December 2024 in a tertiary hospital in Bangladesh were included in this cross-sectional study. Identification of organisms and AST were performed using both DST and standard AST methods, according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute's guidelines. The results of the two methods were compared for agreement or errors.
resultsA total of 100 bacteria were detected by DST and standardized AST method from the positive blood culture bottles, where
conclusionDST from positive blood culture broth can reduce turnaround time and enable earlier initiation of antibiotic therapy in septicemic patients.
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.