Connection

Roger White to Microbial Sensitivity Tests

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Roger White has written about Microbial Sensitivity Tests.
Connection Strength

0.773
  1. Comparison of methods of interpretation of checkerboard synergy testing. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2002 Dec; 44(4):363-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.195
  2. Comparison of three different in vitro methods of detecting synergy: time-kill, checkerboard, and E test. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996 Aug; 40(8):1914-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.126
  3. Impact of different statistical methodologies on the evaluation of the in-vitro MICs for Bacteroides fragilis of selected cephalosporins and cephamycins. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993 Jan; 31(1):57-64.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.098
  4. Pseudoresistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa resulting from degradation of imipenem in an automated susceptibility testing system with predried panels. J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Feb; 29(2):398-400.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.086
  5. Assessment of differences in antimicrobial effect determined with two in vitro pharmacodynamic models: impact of surface area to volume ratio. Pharmacotherapy. 2003 May; 23(5):603-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.050
  6. Comparative activity of gatifloxacin and other antibiotics against 4009 clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae in the United States during 1999-2000. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2002 Jul; 43(3):207-17.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.047
  7. Comparative in vitro pharmacodynamics of imipenem and meropenem against ATCC strains of Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Bacteroides fragilis. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2001 Jan; 39(1):39-47.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.043
  8. A pilot study of the efficacy of constant-infusion ceftazidime in the treatment of endobronchial infections in adults with cystic fibrosis. Pharmacotherapy. 1999 May; 19(5):620-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  9. A pharmacodynamic model for the action of the antibiotic imipenem on Pseudomonas aeruginosa populations in vitro. Bull Math Biol. 1996 Sep; 58(5):923-38.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.032
  10. Cefotaxime stability during in vitro microbiological testing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Sep; 31(9):1375-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  11. Evaluation of antibiotic synergy against Acinetobacter baumannii: a comparison with Etest, time-kill, and checkerboard methods. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2000 Sep; 38(1):43-50.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  12. Impact of use of multiple antimicrobials on changes in susceptibility of gram-negative aerobes. Clin Infect Dis. 1999 May; 28(5):1017-24.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  13. Comparative bactericidal activity of ceftazidime against isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa as assessed in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model versus the traditional time-kill method. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997 Nov; 41(11):2527-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  14. In vitro pharmacodynamics of ceftazidime against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from cystic fibrosis patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997 Sep; 41(9):2053-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  15. Evaluation of cephalosporins/cephamycins with antianaerobic activity by integrating microbiologic and pharmacokinetic properties. Clin Ther. 1991 Sep-Oct; 13(5):596-605.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.