ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026
Risk prediction of carbapenem-resistant
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to investigate the infection distribution, drug resistance, and risk factors associated with carbapenem-resistant Methods: Two retrospective cohorts were established based on the Children's Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University. The derivation cohort included 1397 children with Results: Among the 1397 PA isolates, 1177 were CSPA and 220 were CRPA. Children in the CRPA group were younger, had longer hospital stays, and were more prevalent in the NICU and PICU than those in the CSPA group. Among CRPA isolates, 88.2% met multidrug-resistant criteria and 46.4% met extensively drug-resistant criteria, while maintaining high sensitivity to amikacin (95%). The XGBoost model, incorporating 10 key variables, achieved an AUC of 0.848 (95% CI, 0.783-0.912) on the internal test set and 0.715 (95% CI, 0.622-0.807) on the temporal validation cohort. SHAP interpretability analysis showed that length of hospital stay, CD8 Conclusion: CRPA infection in children is closely associated with prolonged hospitalization, immune dysregulation, invasive procedures, and prior carbapenem exposure. The XGBoost prediction model demonstrated good discrimination in internal validation, and its performance remained stable on temporal validation, suggesting potential utility in identifying high-risk children for early clinical intervention.
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.