The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Antimicrobial Resistance and Clinical Outcome of Bacteroides Bacteremia: Findings of a Multicenter Prospective Observational Trial
Abstract
There is debate regarding the correlation between in vitro susceptibility testing and clinical response to therapy for Bacteroides bacteremia. We conducted a prospective multicenter observational study of 128 patients with bacteroides bacteremia. Outcome was correlated with results of in vitro susceptibility testing of Bacteroides isolates recovered from blood and/or nonblood sites, determined with use of 3 end points: mortality at 30 days, clinical response (cure vs. failure), and microbiological response (eradication vs. persistence). The mortality rate among patients who received inactive therapy (45%) was higher than among patients who received active therapy (16%; P=.04). Clinical failure (82%) and microbiological persistence (42%) were higher for patients who received inactive therapy than for patients who received active therapy (22% and 12%, respectively; P=.0002 and.06, respectively). In vitro activity of agents directed at Bacteroides species reliably predicts outcome: the specificity was 97%, and positive predictive value was 82%. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing may be indicated for patients whose blood specimens yield Bacteroides species.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Nguyen, M. H. (1995) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.1995.00430220087009 · Cited by 363
Self-citation
Cited by
Pathogenicity Islands in BacterialPathogenesis
Schmidt, H., & Hensel, M. (2004) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.17.1.14-56.2004 · Cited by 776
Metronidazole Is Still the Drug of Choice for Treatment of Anaerobic Infections
Löfmark, S., Edlund, C., & Nord, C. E. (2010) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/647939 · Cited by 656
Solomkin, J. S., Mazuski, J. E., Bradley, J. S., Rodvold, K. A., Goldstein, E. J. C., Baron, E. J., O'Neill, P. J., Chow, A. W., Dellinger, E. P., Eachempati, S. R., et al. (2010) · Surgical Infections · doi:10.1089/sur.2009.9930 · Cited by 623
Has antifungal susceptibility testing come of age
Rex, J. H., & Pfaller, M. A. (2002) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/342384 · Cited by 361
The effects of dairy and dairy derivatives on the gut microbiota: a systematic literature review
Aslam, H., Marx, W., Rocks, T., Loughman, A., Chandrasekaran, V., Ruusunen, A., Dawson, S. L., West, M., Mullarkey, E., Pasco, J. A., et al. (2020) · Gut Microbes · doi:10.1080/19490976.2020.1799533 · Cited by 170
Metadata
- Authors
- Nguyen, M. H., Yu, V. L., Morris, A. J., McDermott, L., Wagener, M. W., Harrell, L., & Snydman, D. R.
- Venue
- Clinical Infectious Diseases
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-06-01
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 870-876
- ISSN
- 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-6591
- OpenAlex
- W2165880675
- Cited by
- 215
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Antimicrobial Resistance and Clinical Outcome of Bacteroides Bacteremia: Findings of a Multicenter Prospective Observational Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/313805
- The paper
- Nguyen, M. H., Yu, V. L., Morris, A. J., McDermott, L., Wagener, M. W., Harrell, L., & Snydman, D. R. (2000). Antimicrobial Resistance and Clinical Outcome of Bacteroides Bacteremia: Findings of a Multicenter Prospective Observational Trial. Clinical Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1086/313805
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.