ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2026
[Advances in integrated antimicrobial resistance diagnostics: quantitative, qualitative and AI-driven approaches].
Review in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The rapid global increase in antimicrobial resistance complicates the treatment of life-threatening infections and makes fast, reliable antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) essential. While phenotypic methods such as broth dilution, agar diffusion, gradient diffusion and automated systems remain the diagnostic standard, they are limited by long turnaround times. Rapid phenotypic AST (RAST) approaches shorten the time to first results to 4 to 8 h and allow earlier optimisation of anti-infective therapy, although their clinical benefit has not yet been conclusively demonstrated and their use is restricted to validated pathogens and substances.In parallel, molecular methods such as PCR, isothermal amplification and, increasingly, whole-genome sequencing enable rapid detection of key resistance determinants (e.g., mecA/C, vanA/B, extended-spectrum beta-lactamases [ESBL] and carbapenemase genes), thereby particularly supporting the workup of positive blood cultures and surveillance investigations. Their predictive value is high for Gram-positive pathogens but limited for Gram-negative organisms due to the diversity of resistance mechanisms. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers additional potential for automated interpretation of phenotypic tests, analysis of complex genomic data and mass-spectrometry-based resistance prediction models, but faces challenges regarding standardisation, generalisability and data quality.Overall, novel RAST, molecular and AI-supported approaches usefully complement but do not replace classical methods. Their clinical impact depends on targeted implementation and integration into effective antibiotic and diagnostic stewardship structures.
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.