ArticleIranian journal of microbiology2026
Antimicrobial resistance surveillance of clinical bacterial isolates at Maryamana private hospital, Erbil-Iraq (2023-2025): antibiogram data and multidrug-resistant (MDR)/extensively drug-resistant (XDR)/pandrug-resistant (PDR) classification.
Article in Iranian journal of 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a critical global health threat, with multidrug-resistant (MDR), extensively drug-resistant (XDR), and pandrug-resistant (PDR) pathogens increasingly prevalent in healthcare settings. The study aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of AMR among clinical bacterial isolates, including detailed antibiogram profiling and prevalence of MDR, XDR, and PDR phenotypes, to inform local treatment guidelines and antimicrobial stewardship strategies. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis was conducted on 2,945 clinical specimens (blood, wound, sputum, urine, vaginal swabs, and others). Bacterial identification was performed using VITEK 2 automated system. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was conducted according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines. MDR, XDR, and PDR classifications were applied. Results: Out of 2,851 major clinical specimens, Gram-negative bacteria predominated (53%), with highest isolation rates from wound, sputum, and urine samples. Gram-positive organisms accounted for 30%, while Conclusion: This study demonstrates alarmingly high rates of MDR, XDR, and PDR among clinical bacterial isolates, with Gram-negative bacteria showing significantly greater resistance burden than Gram-positive organisms.
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.