ReviewJAC-antimicrobial resistance2026
Antimicrobial stewardship resourcing and programme outcomes: a scoping review.
Review in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antimicrobial stewardship programmes (ASPs) are essential to mitigate antimicrobial resistance, yet inadequate human and financial resourcing is a persistent barrier limiting their implementation. While ASPs are associated with improved outcomes, the relationship between the extent of resourcing and outcomes is less clear. This scoping review described the evidence on the association between ASP resourcing and antimicrobial use, patient, programmatic and economic outcomes. Methods: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidance (protocol: https://osf.io/hbe59). Medline, EMBASE, Scopus and CINAHL were searched from inception, supplemented by grey literature searches. Eligible studies evaluated at least two models of ASP resourcing and associated outcomes. Screening and extraction were performed in duplicate, and quality assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Outcomes were synthesized descriptively. Results: Of 2447 citations screened, 32 studies were included. Most studies were observational, hospital-based and from high-income countries. Resourcing comparisons included: coverage models ( Conclusion: While increased ASP resourcing appears to be associated with improved antimicrobial use and cost outcomes in many studies, evidence remains heterogeneous. These findings underscore the need for rigorous, prospective studies and evidence-based recommendations to guide optimal ASP staffing.
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.