Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10160079›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics1995

Formulary management of macrolide antibiotics.

D R Guay

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

D R GuaySection of Clinical Pharmacology, St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center, MN 55101, USA.
University of Minnesota · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Selection of macrolide antibiotics for formulary addition can be a difficult task, with the increasing availability of new agents as well as the numerous differences in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of available agents. Nonetheless, appropriate evaluation of the important characteristics of macrolide antibiotics should allow selection of the most cost-effective agents for formulary addition. Most importantly, differences in antimicrobial activity and efficacy, product formulation, tolerability and cost should be carefully considered when making formulary decisions. Notably, evidence from in vitro studies and clinical trials indicate differences between the macrolide antibiotics, especially in the management of a variety of opportunistic infections in immunocompromised patients. For selected clinical situations, it may be important to select an effective agent available in both oral and intravenous formulations, especially in severe pneumonia caused by Legionella spp. In addition, the availability of generic formulations should be considered for its potential to reduce cost. Comparative drug costs, as well as costs associated with noncompliance, should also be evaluated carefully. Dosage regimens should also be considered, as shorter durations of therapy and less frequent dose administration may lead to increased compliance and thereby improved effectiveness and economic efficiency.

Indexed as

Formularies, Hospital as TopicAnti-Bacterial AgentsDrug InteractionsDrug Resistance, MicrobialHumansMacrolidesStructure-Activity RelationshipAnti-Bacterial AgentsMacrolides

Identifiers

PMID10160079
OpenAlexW2116910780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.