Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 325

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The preventable proportion of healthcare-associated infections 2005–2016: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Schreiber, Peter W., Sax, Hugo, Wolfensberger, Aline, Clack, Lauren, Kuster, Stefan P., Swissnoso·2018·Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology

Abstract

Objective: The preventable proportion of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) may decrease over time as standards of care improve. We aimed to assess the proportion of HAIs prevented by multifaceted infection control interventions in different economic settings. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched OVID Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, and The Cochrane Library for studies published between 2005 and 2016 assessing multifaceted interventions to reduce catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs), central-line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), surgical site infections (SSIs), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), and hospital-acquired pneumonia not associated with mechanical ventilation (HAP) in acute-care or long-term care settings. For studies reporting raw rates, we extracted data and calculated the natural log of the risk ratio and variance to obtain pooled risk ratio estimates. Results: Of the 5,226 articles identified by our search, 144 studies were included in the final analysis. Pooled incidence rate ratios associated with multifaceted interventions were 0.543 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.445–0.662) for CAUTI, 0.459 (95% CI, 0.381–0.554) for CLABSI, and 0.553 (95% CI, 0.465–0.657) for VAP. The pooled rate ratio was 0.461 (95% CI, 0.389–0.546) for interventions aiming at SSI reduction, and for VAP reduction initiatives, the pooled rate ratios were 0.611 (95% CI, 0.414–0.900) for before-and-after studies and 0.509 (95% CI, 0.277–0.937) for randomized controlled trials. Reductions in infection rates were independent of the economic status of the study country. The risk of bias was high in 143 of 144 studies (99.3%). Conclusions: Published evidence suggests a sustained potential for the significant reduction of HAI rates in the range of 35%–55% associated with multifaceted interventions irrespective of a country’s income level.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/ice.2018.183

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Cited by

See all 325

Metadata

Authors
Schreiber, P. W., Sax, H., Wolfensberger, A., Clack, L., Kuster, S. P., & Swissnoso
Venue
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
Published
2018-09-20
Volume
39
Issue
11
Pages
1277-1295
ISSN
  • 0899-823X (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-6834
OpenAlex
W2891359926
Cited by
325
References
24
FWCI
3.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The preventable proportion of healthcare-associated infections 2005–2016: Systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/ice.2018.183
The paper
Schreiber, P. W., Sax, H., Wolfensberger, A., Clack, L., Kuster, S. P., & Swissnoso. (2018). The preventable proportion of healthcare-associated infections 2005–2016: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2018.183

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.