SynthesisPloS one2026
Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in Tanzania: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2026. 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.
- Antibiotic residues and antimicrobial resistance patterns of bacteria isolated from beef at Ruti Rufura Slaughterhouse, southwestern Uganda.Frontiers in microbiology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) threatens global health, and understanding resistance patterns aids in effective treatment and promotes responsible antimicrobial use. Despite the urgency of resistant pathogens, systematic reviews focusing specifically on Tanzania are limited, and while several studies report resistance patterns for individual pathogens, a consolidated analysis of overall prevalence is needed to inform policymaking and public health interventions. Therefore, this review and meta-analysis assessed the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among clinically relevant pathogens in Tanzania, providing a comprehensive overview to support surveillance, infection control, and stewardship efforts. A total of 1865 studies identified from Google Scholar (1600), PubMed (13), and Science Direct (252) underwent screening and full article review. Finally, 28 studies were included. A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the resistance patterns within antibiotic classes for specific pathogens. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the characteristics of the studies, while the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance was estimated through Meta-analysis. Inconsistency and heterogeneity between studies were quantified by the I2 index. Among the included studies, most isolates (25.0%) were obtained from urine samples. Of these studies, 75% were cross-sectional studies and 92.9% were conducted in hospital settings. The analysis revealed high resistance to penicillin, particularly amoxicillin-clavulanic and ampicillin, with Klebsiella pneumoniae (0.96 [0.83-0.99]), Acinetobacter baumannii (0.94 [0.67-0.99]) and Escherichia coli (0.90 [0.81-0.95]). Similarly, erythromycin resistance was most prevalent in Campylobacter spp. (0.85 [0.80-0.89]). Ciprofloxacin resistance was highest in Acinetobacter baumannii (0.54 [0.33-0.73]), whereas amikacin resistance was highest in Proteus spp. (0.86 [0.35-0.99]). Ceftriaxone resistance was particularly high in Acinetobacter baumannii (0.91 [0.70-0.98]) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (0.85 [0.74-0.92]). Meropenem resistance was lowest among Escherichia coli (0.04 [0.01-0.10]) and Klebsiella spp. (0.07 [0.03-0.15]), while the pooled resistance across ESKAPE-E pathogens was (0.11[0.06-0.19]). Imipenem and clindamycin each had an overall pooled resistance of (0.06[0.02-0.14]) against both Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. The findings highlight widespread resistance among bacterial pathogens, ESKAPE-E, particularly in the Access and Watch groups of antibiotics. The variability in resistance patterns underscores the need for the Ministry of Health to re-evaluate empirical treatment protocols (STG/NEMLIT) to ensure effective treatment regimens, strengthen antimicrobial stewardship, enhance surveillance systems, and promote rational antibiotic use.
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.