ReviewCureus2026
Antimicrobial Stewardship in Urgent Care Settings: A Systematic Review of Prescribing, Clinical, and Microbiological Outcomes.
Review in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emergency and urgent care settings are frequently the first point of antimicrobial prescribing, making them a key setting for antimicrobial stewardship. Despite growing recommendations for implementing antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in urgent care settings, evidence of their effectiveness and impact remains dispersed. This systematic review evaluated the impact of ASPs on antimicrobial prescribing, clinical and microbiological outcomes, and implementation in urgent care settings. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception to identify eligible studies. Randomized and non-randomized studies, interrupted time series analyses, before-and-after studies, and cohort studies conducted in adult or pediatric urgent care settings were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. Owing to methodological and clinical heterogeneity, findings were synthesized narratively. Twelve studies published between January 2016 and March 2026 met the inclusion criteria. Most interventions combined clinician education, prescribing guidelines, clinical decision support, audits with feedback, pharmacist reviews, or multidisciplinary stewardship strategies. Eleven of the twelve completed studies reported reductions in antimicrobial prescribing or improved prescribing appropriateness following program implementation. Educational and guideline-based interventions demonstrated the largest reductions in broad-spectrum antibiotic use. Clinical outcomes, including mortality and return visits, remained largely unchanged. Evidence relating to microbiological and economic outcomes was limited, although
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.