Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 785

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) pilot point prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use

Open access
Zarb, P, Coignard, B, Griskeviciene, J, Muller, A, Vankerckhoven, V, Weist, K, Goossens, M M, Vaerenberg, S, Hopkins, S, Catry, B, Monnet, D L, Goossens, H, Suetens, C, National Contact Points for the ECD, Collective, Hospital Contact Points for the ECD, Collective·2012·Eurosurveillance

Abstract

A standardised methodology for a combined point prevalence survey (PPS) on healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial use in European acute care hospitals developed by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control was piloted across Europe. Variables were collected at national, hospital and patient level in 66 hospitals from 23 countries. A patient-based and a unit-based protocol were available. Feasibility was assessed via national and hospital questionnaires. Of 19,888 surveyed patients, 7.1% had an HAI and 34.6% were receiving at least one antimicrobial agent. Prevalence results were highest in intensive care units, with 28.1% patients with HAI, and 61.4% patients with antimicrobial use. Pneumonia and other lower respiratory tract infections (2.0% of patients; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8–2.2%) represented the most common type (25.7%) of HAI. Surgical prophylaxis was the indication for 17.3% of used antimicrobials and exceeded one day in 60.7% of cases. Risk factors in the patient-based protocol were provided for 98% or more of the included patients and all were independently associated with both presence of HAI and receiving an antimicrobial agent. The patient-based protocol required more work than the unit-based protocol, but allowed collecting detailed data and analysis of risk factors for HAI and antimicrobial use.

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 · 10.2807/ese.17.46.20316-en

Cites

30 of 30 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 30 references

Cited by

See all 785

Metadata

Authors
Zarb, P., Coignard, B., Griskeviciene, J., Muller, A., Vankerckhoven, V, Weist, K., Goossens, M. M., Vaerenberg, S., Hopkins, S., Catry, B., Monnet, D. L., Goossens, H., Suetens, C., National Contact Points for the ECD, C., & Hospital Contact Points for the ECD, C.
Venue
Eurosurveillance
Published
2012-11-15
Volume
17
Issue
46
ISSN
  • 1025-496X (ISSN-L)
  • 1560-7917
OpenAlex
W1796131488
Cited by
785
References
30
FWCI
41.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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 European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) pilot point prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2807/ese.17.46.20316-en
The paper
Zarb, P., Coignard, B., Griskeviciene, J., Muller, A., Vankerckhoven, V, Weist, K., Goossens, M. M., Vaerenberg, S., Hopkins, S., Catry, B., Monnet, D. L., Goossens, H., Suetens, C., National Contact Points for the ECD, C., & Hospital Contact Points for the ECD, C. (2012). The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) pilot point prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use. Eurosurveillance. https://doi.org/10.2807/ese.17.46.20316-en

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.