The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Room for improvement: a systematic review of the quality of evaluations of interventions to improve hospital antibiotic prescribing
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In 1999, the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC) and Hospital Infection Society (HIS) convened a working party on optimization of antibiotic prescribing in hospitals. This study was undertaken in order to evaluate the current evidence base on the effectiveness of interventions to change antibiotic prescribing to hospital inpatients. METHODS: We have systematically reviewed the literature from 1980 to identify interventions that alone, or in combination, are effective in improving antibiotic prescribing to hospital inpatients. The protocol was peer reviewed and has been published by the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) Group of the Cochrane Collaboration (www.update-software.com/cochrane/). RESULTS: We identified 306 papers, of which 91 (30%) met the minimum inclusion criteria for a Cochrane EPOC review. The reasons for exclusion were uncontrolled before and after design (141/306; 46%) and inadequate interrupted time series (74/306; 24%) with fewer than three observations before and after the intervention. Most of the rejected interrupted time series (ITS) studies had only one or two data points before the intervention with many (up to 15) after it. Only 15 (40%) of the 38 included ITS studies had a statistical analysis and 11 of these used inappropriate statistical tests (e.g. t-test of pre- and post-intervention mean data) rather than analysis of time trends. Regression analysis of the proportion of included studies by year of publication did show a significant positive correlation (R2 = 0.7886). Nonetheless, of 47 papers published since 2000, only 19 (40%) met the minimum eligibility criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of evaluations used fundamentally flawed methodology. There is limited evidence of improvement over time. These problems could be resolved if researchers and referees of protocols or manuscripts implemented the EPOC methodology.
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
Segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series studies in medication use research
Wagner, A. K., Soumerai, S. B., Zhang, F., & Ross-Degnan, D. (2002) · Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2710.2002.00430.x · Cited by 3,279
Cited by
Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices for hospital inpatients
Davey, P., Marwick, C. A., Scott, C. L., Charani, E., McNeil, K., Brown, E., Gould, I. M., Ramsay, C. R., & Michie, S. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003543.pub4 · Cited by 1,068
Self-citationOperation LASER and the Effectiveness of Hotspot Patrol: A Panel Analysis
Uchida, C. D., & Swatt, M. L. (2013) · Police Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1098611113497044 · Cited by 108
Schweitzer, V. A., van Werkhoven, C. H., Rodríguez Baño, J., Bielicki, J., Harbarth, S., Hulscher, M., Huttner, B., Islam, J., Little, P., Pulcini, C., et al. (2020) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2019.08.017 · Cited by 73
Metadata
- Authors
- Ramsay, C., Brown, E., Hartman, G., & Davey, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-11
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 764-771
- ISSN
- 0305-7453 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2091
- OpenAlex
- W2160307009
- Cited by
- 158
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.65
- 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: Room for improvement: a systematic review of the quality of evaluations of interventions to improve hospital antibiotic prescribing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jac/dkg460
- The paper
- Ramsay, C., Brown, E., Hartman, G., & Davey, P. (2003). Room for improvement: a systematic review of the quality of evaluations of interventions to improve hospital antibiotic prescribing. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkg460
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.