ReviewJournal of global antimicrobial resistance2026
Intervention studies and antimicrobial resistance in Italy: An overview of the latest evidence.
Review in Journal of global antimicrobial resistance, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antimicrobial Resistance in Six Priority Bacteria in Italy: Trends and Regional Variation, 2015-2024.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Investigation of Biofilm Formation and Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacteria Isolated from Hospital Medical Devices.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Antibacterial Biofilms of Chitosan Incorporated with the Ethanolic Extract of the Stem Bark ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a significant and growing threat to public health globally, with Italy facing some of the highest resistance rates in Europe. This manuscript reviewed recent Italian intervention studies aimed at mitigating AMR across bacterial, fungal, and viral domains.
methodsStrategies including antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), infection prevention and control (IPC), antifungal stewardship (AFS), and diagnostic advancements were evaluated. The evidence highlighted both the promise and limitations of Italy's current approach.
resultsWhile AMS and IPC programs have reduced antibiotic use, healthcare-associated infections, and costs, regional disparities, inconsistent implementation, and limited longitudinal surveillance remain critical challenges. The fungal resistance landscape is marked by rising threats like Candida auris, requiring urgent expansion of AFS programs. Italy's AMR strategy would benefit from improved IPC infrastructure, realtime data integration, and alignment with One Health principles.
conclusionsStrengthening national coordination, supportinginnovation, and translating surveillance into action at the local level are crucial for turning policy into measurable progress. This review provides actionable insights to guide a more unified and responsive national AMR framework.
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.