Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Risk of death from methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: a meta‐analysis

Whitby, Michael, McLaws, Mary‐Louise, Berry, Geoffrey·2001·Medical Journal of Australia

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the risk of death from healthcare-associated (nosocomial) bacteraemia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and compare it with that of nosocomial bacteraemia caused by methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA), by meta-analysis of selected studies. DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE, Current Contents and Cochrane Library were searched for the period January 1978 (or earliest date of the database, if later than 1978) to December 2000. STUDY SELECTION: Studies which compared mortality of nosocomial MRSA and MSSA bacteraemia. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nine studies were analysed. All but one found an increased relative risk (RR) of death from MRSA bacteraemia, with RR ranging from 0.89 to 4.94. Meta-analysis showed that patients with MRSA bacteraemia have an RR of death, compared with patients with MSSA bacteraemia, of 2.12 (95% CI, 1.76-2.57) using the fixed-effect method, and 2.03 (95% CI, 1.55-2.65) using the random-effect method. CONCLUSION: MRSA bacteraemia is associated with a real increase in risk of death, further justifying ongoing MRSA surveillance and control in healthcare facilities.

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 · 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2001.tb143562.x

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.

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Whitby, M., McLaws, M., & Berry, G.
Venue
Medical Journal of Australia
Publisher
AMPCo
Published
2001-09
Volume
175
Issue
5
Pages
264-267
ISSN
  • 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
  • 1326-5377
OpenAlex
W2399827296
Cited by
296
References
0
FWCI
5.00
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

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.