Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Emerging resistance among bacterial pathogens in the intensive care unit – a European and North American Surveillance study (2000–2002)

Open access
Jones, Mark E, Draghi, Deborah C, Thornsberry, Clyde, Karlowsky, James A, Sahm, Daniel F, Wenzel, Richard P·2004·Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials

Abstract

Background: Globally ICUs are encountering emergence and spread of antibiotic-resistant pathogens and for some pathogens there are few therapeutic options available. Methods: Antibiotic in vitro susceptibility data of predominant ICU pathogens during 2000–2 were analyzed using data from The Surveillance Network (TSN) Databases in Europe (France, Germany and Italy), Canada, and the United States (US). Results: Oxacillin resistance rates among Staphylococcus aureus isolates ranged from 19.7% to 59.4%. Penicillin resistance rates among Streptococcus pneumoniae varied from 2.0% in Germany to as high as 20.2% in the US; however, ceftriaxone resistance rates were comparably lower, ranging from 0% in Germany to 3.4% in Italy. Vancomycin resistance rates among Enterococcus faecalis were ≤ 4.5%; however, among Enterococcus faecium vancomycin resistance rates were more frequent ranging from 0.8% in France to 76.3% in the United States. Putative rates of extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) production among Enterobacteriaceae were low, <6% among Escherichia coli in the five countries studied. Ceftriaxone resistance rates were generally lower than or similar to piperacillin-tazobactam for most of the Enterobacteriaceae species examined. Fluoroquinolone resistance rates were generally higher for E. coli (6.5% – 13.9%), Proteus mirabilis (0–34.7%), and Morganella morganii (1.6–20.7%) than other Enterobacteriaceae spp (1.5–21.3%). P. aeruginosa demonstrated marked variation in β-lactam resistance rates among countries. Imipenem was the most active compound tested against Acinetobacter spp., based on resistance rates. Conclusion: There was a wide distribution in resistance patterns among the five countries. Compared with other countries, Italy showed the highest resistance rates to all the organisms with the exception of Enterococcus spp., which were highest in the US. This data highlights the differences in resistance encountered in intensive care units in Europe and North America and the need to determine current local resistance patterns by which to guide empiric antimicrobial therapy for intensive care infections.

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 · 10.1186/1476-0711-3-14

Cites

14 of 14 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 14 references

Cited by

See all 269

Metadata

Authors
Jones, M. E., Draghi, D. C., Thornsberry, C., Karlowsky, J. A., Sahm, D. F., & Wenzel, R. P.
Venue
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
Published
2004-07-29
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
14-14
ISSN
1476-0711 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1510985733
Cited by
269
References
14
FWCI
11.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Emerging resistance among bacterial pathogens in the intensive care unit – a European and North American Surveillance study (2000–2002). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1476-0711-3-14
The paper
Jones, M. E., Draghi, D. C., Thornsberry, C., Karlowsky, J. A., Sahm, D. F., & Wenzel, R. P. (2004). Emerging resistance among bacterial pathogens in the intensive care unit – a European and North American Surveillance study (2000–2002). Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-0711-3-14

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.