ReviewGMS hygiene and infection control2025
Healthcare-associated infections.
Review in GMS hygiene and infection control, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge and Perception of Nosocomial Infections Among Patients in a Tertiary Hospital in the Qassim Region.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Pathogen-specific clinical and inflammatory phenotypes in pediatric catheter-related infections.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of the aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI) and its modified version for early detection of central line-associated bloodstream infection: a pilot study using machine learning techniques.GMS hygiene and infection control · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) continue to be a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and increased healthcare costs worldwide. Despite advances in infection prevention, the burden of HAIs remains high, exacerbated by the rise of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and the growing complexity of patient care. Effective prevention strategies are critical to reducing HAI rates and improving patient outcomes. This review aims to highlight the clinical significance of HAIs, explore their impact on patient safety, and underscore the necessity for robust surveillance and infection control (IC) programs across healthcare settings. Results: The study found that HAIs continue to affect a significant proportion of hospitalized patients, with invasive devices and antimicrobial-resistant pathogens being key contributors. Surveillance systems, when combined with targeted IC protocols and continuous staff education, can reduce HAI incidence and improve patient safety. Moreover, the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs and proper hygiene practices along with emerging technologies plays a pivotal role in curbing the spread of resistant organisms. Conclusion: Healthcare systems must prioritize HAI prevention to safeguard patient safety, reduce treatment costs, and combat the growing threat of AMR.
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.