SynthesisSystematic reviews2025
Rate of bacterial positivity following antibiotic initiation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fast Microbiology: A Pilot Study Comparing Culture-Independent Digital PCR and Blood Culture for Pathogen Detection in Sepsis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBacterial culture remains a critical tool for pathogen identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing. However, its diagnostic accuracy is often compromised by prior antibiotic administration, which can reduce the recovery of viable organisms and lead to false-negative results. Given the variability and limitations in the existing studies, a systematic review is needed to better understand the influence of antibiotics on culture yield.
methodsWe conducted an electronic search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science from their inception through March 2025. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included articles. Random effects models were used to estimate the proportions and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs). The protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42025648397.
resultsOf the 1226 articles obtained from the search, 11 were eligible. The eligible articles comprised 67,330 samples with culture results after antibiotic administration. The pooled proportion for bacterial growth was 37% (95% CI 20-56%) and 18% (95% CI 10-29%) before and after antibiotic administration, respectively. Significant heterogeneity (I
conclusionBacterial growth decreased by more than half following antibiotic administration, indicating a strong suppressive effect. This highlights the importance of considering the timing of sample collection in relation to antibiotic initiation. Where necessary, particularly in cases of uncertain clinical progress, sampling after antibiotic administration can be useful for monitoring prognosis and guiding further treatment decisions. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42025648397.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.