The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic review of isolation policies in the hospital management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a review of the literature with epidemiological and economic modelling
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for the effectiveness of different isolation policies and screening practices in reducing the incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonisation and infection in hospital in-patients. To develop transmission models to study the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of isolation policies in controlling MRSA. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library and SIGLE (1966-2000). Hand-searching key journals. No language restrictions. REVIEW METHODS: Key data were extracted from articles reporting MRSA-related outcomes and describing an isolation policy in a hospital with epidemic or endemic MRSA. No quality restrictions were imposed on studies using isolation wards (IW) or nurse cohorting (NC). Other studies were included if they were prospective or employed planned comparisons of retrospective data. Stochastic and deterministic models investigated long-term transmission dynamics, studying the effect of a fixed capacity IW, producing economic evaluations using local cost data. RESULTS: A total of 46 studies were accepted: 18 IWs, 9 NC, 19 other isolation policies. Most were interrupted time series, with few planned formal prospective studies. All but one reported multiple interventions. Consideration of potential confounders, measures to prevent bias, and appropriate statistical analysis were mostly lacking. No conclusions could be drawn in a third of studies. Most others provided evidence consistent with reduction of MRSA acquisition. Six long interrupted time series provided the strongest evidence. Four of these provided evidence that intensive control measures which included patient isolation were effective in controlling MRSA. In two others IW use failed to prevent endemic MRSA. There was no robust economic evaluation. Models showed that improving the detection rate or ensuring adequate isolation capacity reduced endemic levels, with substantial savings achievable. CONCLUSIONS: Major methodological weaknesses and inadequate reporting in published research mean that many plausible alternative explanations for reductions in MRSA acquisition associated with interventions cannot be excluded. No well-designed studies allow the role of isolation measures alone to be assessed. Nonetheless, there is evidence that concerted efforts that include isolation can reduce MRSA even when endemic. Little evidence was found to suggest that current isolation measures recommended in the UK are ineffective, and these should continue to be applied until further research establishes otherwise. The studies with the strongest evidence, together with the results of the modelling, provide testable hypotheses for future research. Guidelines to facilitate design of future research are produced.
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
Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programme to improve compliance with hand hygiene
Pittet, D., Hugonnet, S., Harbarth, S., Mourouga, P., Sauvan, V., Touveneau, S., & Perneger, T. V. (2000) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)02814-2 · Cited by 2,524
The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis
Jüni, P. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1054 · Cited by 1,981
Sterne, J. A. C. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7280.226 · Cited by 1,466
Cited by
Hobart, J., & Cano, S. (2009) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta13120 · Cited by 621
Livermore, D. M. (2004) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1111/j.1465-0691.2004.1004.x · Cited by 314
Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes: systematic review
Clar, C., Barnard, K., Cummins, E., Royle, P., & Waugh, N. (2010) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta14120 · Cited by 274
Little, P., Turner, S., Rumsby, K., Warner, G., Moore, M., Lowes, J., Smith, H., Hawke, C., Turner, D., Leydon, G., et al. (2009) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta13190 · Cited by 137
Loveday, H. P., Pellowe, C. M., Jones, S. R. L. J., & Pratt, R. J. (2006) · Journal of Hospital Infection · doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2006.01.002 · Cited by 111
Metadata
- Authors
- Cooper, B., Stone, S., Kibbler, C., Cookson, B., Roberts, J., Medley, G., Duckworth, G., Lai, R., & Ebrahim, S.
- Venue
- Health Technology Assessment
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 39
- Pages
- 1-194
- ISSN
- 1366-5278 (ISSN-L)
- 2046-4924
- OpenAlex
- W1988516867
- Cited by
- 230
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 1.86
- 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: Systematic review of isolation policies in the hospital management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a review of the literature with epidemiological and economic modelling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3310/hta7390
- The paper
- Cooper, B., Stone, S., Kibbler, C., Cookson, B., Roberts, J., Medley, G., Duckworth, G., Lai, R., & Ebrahim, S. (2003). Systematic review of isolation policies in the hospital management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a review of the literature with epidemiological and economic modelling. Health Technology Assessment. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta7390
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.