ArticleFrontiers in antibiotics2025
Stakeholder perspectives on a hypothetical rapid test for antibiotic resistant bacteria: an exploratory study.
Article in Frontiers in antibiotics, 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.
- Stakeholder perspectives on a hypothetical rapid test for antibiotic resistant bacteria: an exploratory study.Frontiers in antibiotics · 2025Article
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
Antibiotic resistance remains a significant public health concern. One possible solution is to develop a new type of highly accessible test for antibiotic resistance that can be rapidly and easily utilized. As new diagnostics for measuring antibiotic resistance continue to be developed, several key practical, ethical, and social factors must be considered, including the types of tests that might be useful, their potential beneficiaries, and the contexts in which they should be utilized. This study aims to gather insights from key stakeholders regarding the ethical implications, benefits, and potential risks associated with a hypothetical rapid antibiotic resistance test that may also be designed for home use. A total of 32 semi-structured interviews were conducted with three stakeholder groups: potential users, medical providers, and ethicists. While prospective users of the test were generally positive about the proposed test, this might reflect public acceptance of point of care/home tests in general, rather than one specifically measuring ABR. Medical providers and experts knowledgeable about the problems of antibiotic overuse quickly pointed out some drawbacks and areas of concern for home testing for ABR, offering helpful guidance on where further research and consideration are needed.
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.