ReviewDrugs1999
Activity of quinolones against Chlamydia pneumoniae.
Review in Drugs, 1999. 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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quinolones are currently being used as empirical therapy for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia and other respiratory infections as they cover a broad range of conventional bacterial and 'atypical' pathogens, including Chlamydia pneumoniae. C. pneumoniae has been associated with 10 to 20% of community-acquired pneumonia in adults and recently has been implicated as being associated with several nonrespiratory conditions, including atherosclerosis. However, data on the treatment of even respiratory infection due to C. pneumoniae are limited. Although currently available quinolones have good activity against C. pneumoniae in vitro, all published treatment studies have relied on serological diagnosis, thus microbiological efficacy has not been assessed. Anecdotal experience suggests that in vitro activity may not always correlate with efficacy in vivo.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.