ArticleScientific reports2026
Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in neonatal intensive care unit of Alexandria University Children's Hospital.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial drugs are fundamental to modern medicine. The rise and spread of drug-resistant microorganisms jeopardize our ability to manage common infections and perform critical medical interventions. The present work aimed to assess and analyze antimicrobial resistance and sensitivity in the neonatal intensive care unit of Alexandria University Children's Hospital to improve antibiotic choices in the neonatal intensive care unit. A medical record-based study of 1105 neonates with sepsis admitted to the NICU during the four-year study period (2019 to 2022) was conducted, with no exclusion criteria. The data were uploaded to the WHONET system after being collected. The results can be recorded as interpreted values: "R" (Resistant), "I" (Intermediate), and "S" (Sensitive). Interpretation guidelines for most standardized testing methodologies were built into the system. In addition, the program also permits retrieval and correction of clinical records. Among the 1105 neonates included in our study, Male patients accounted for 56.4%, with a mean gestational age of 32.67 ± 2.86 weeks. Early-onset neonatal sepsis (EOS) was detected in 329(29.7%), while late-onset neonatal sepsis (LOS) was detected in 776(70.2%) neonates. Klebsiella was the predominant pathogen, accounting for 554 (50.1%). This organism was responsible for 136(24.5%) neonates in 2019, 148(26.7%) neonates in 2020, 137(24.7%) neonates in 2021 and 133(24.0%) neonates in 2022. Candida species was the second most common pathogen in our NICU; 126 (11.4%) cases were distributed as follows: 31 (24.6%), 32 (25.4%), and 40 (31.7%). 23 (18.2%) cases occurred in 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022, respectively. Across the 4 years of the study, 2020 had the highest sepsis frequency. Drug resistance was high in most of the isolates. It was maximum (94-80%) for Cefotaxime, Piperacillin, Amoxicillin/Clavulanic acid, and ceftriaxone. It varied between 60 and 80% for Piperacillin/Tazobactam, Imipenem, Ceftazidime, Cefoperazone/Sulbactam, Meropenem, Ampicillin/Sulbactam, and Ciprofloxacin. The current study found that neonatal sepsis had a nosocomial infection profile shared by both early-onset and late-onset sepsis. K. pneumoniae was the predominant pathogen in both EOS and LOS in our study, similar to other developing countries, and is totally different from developed countries.
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.