ReviewPLOS global public health2025
Not forgetting the humanitarian contexts in the fight against antimicrobial resistance: Operational-driven reflection on knowledge and research gaps by Médecins Sans Frontières.
Review in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strengthening infection prevention and control in humanitarian settings: lessons and opportunities from Médecins Sans Frontières (2021-2023).BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial Resistance in Somalia: Surveillance Gaps, Stewardship Barriers, and One Health Priorities.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) being a growing threat to global public health, there is scarce evidence from humanitarian settings. Working in fragile contexts, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) is well positioned to identify knowledge gaps, raise unrecognised issues, and contribute to the global AMR agenda. Based on MSF's experience, this review intends to highlight the research priorities on AMR for the most vulnerable patients. Infection Prevention and Control (IPC), Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS), and Diagnostics and Surveillance (D&S) should be enhanced by sustainable and context-adapted approaches, especially by strengthening data collection and surveillance. Safety and efficacy studies focusing on vulnerable populations and the development of REASSURED diagnostics should be prioritised. Building evidence to address affordability and availability barriers of antimicrobials, vaccines, and diagnostics is equally essential. Vulnerable populations, including neonates, malnourished children, individuals living with advanced HIV, and patients with war-related injuries, must be placed at the centre of research agendas. It is also essential to address the intersections between AMR, climate change, and conflict. These research priorities are essential to preserving antimicrobial effectiveness and improving patient outcomes in the most neglected settings.
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.