SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002
Antibiotics for the common cold.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Awareness of Antibiotic Misuse in Upper Respiratory Tract Infections Among Adults in the Bisha Governorate in 2024.Cureus · 2024Article
- Natural Products for the Prevention and Treatment of Common Cold and Viral Respiratory Infections.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Trends in the use of antibiotics among Korean children.Korean journal of pediatrics · 2019Article
- Article
- Pervasive antibiotic misuse in the Cambodian community: antibiotic-seeking behaviour with unrestricted access.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2017Article
- Common cold.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2007Article
- A population-based study of different antibiotic prescribing in different areas.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006Article
- Trends in antibiotic prescribing for adults in the United States--1995 to 2002.Journal of general internal medicine · 2005Article
- Infectious triggers of asthma.Immunology and allergy clinics of North America · 2005Review
- Physician behaviour for antimicrobial prescribing for paediatric upper respiratory tract infections: a survey in general practice in Trinidad, West Indies.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2004Article
- Exploring patient- and doctor-related variables associated with antibiotic prescribing for respiratory infections in primary care.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2003Article
- The common cold.Lancet (London, England) · 2003Review
- Antibiotics for acute purulent rhinitis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe common cold is considered to be caused by viruses and it has long been believed that antibiotics have no role in treating this condition. In many countries doctors will often prescribe antibiotics for the common cold in the belief that they may prevent secondary bacterial infection and in some cases to respond to patient demand. There is also increasing concern over the resistance of common bacteria to commonly used antibiotics. A crucial step in reducing the use of antibiotics for the common cold is to examine the evidence to see if there is any benefit or if there is benefit for some subgroups or symptom constellations.
objectives(1) To determine the efficacy of antibiotics in comparison with placebo in the treatment of acute upper respiratory tract infections (common colds) in terms of the proportion of patients in whom the clinical outcome was considered to be a reduction in general symptoms and specific nasopharyngeal symptoms. (2) To determine whether there are significant adverse outcomes associated with antibiotic therapy for patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute upper respiratory tract infection. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Family Medicine Database, and reference lists of articles, and we contacted principal investigators. The most recent search was in May 2001 SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing any antibiotic therapy with placebo in acute upper respiratory tract infections with less than 7 days of symptoms DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN
resultsAll analyses used fixed effects unless otherwise stated Main results: Nine trials involving 2249 (2157 analysed) people aged between two months and 79 years (and adults with no upper age limit) years were included. The overall quality of the included trials was variable. People receiving antibiotics did not do better in terms of lack of cure or persistence of symptoms than those on placebo (odds ratio 0.8, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.59 to 1.08). Only one study Taylor et al (1977) specifically reported persistence of clear rhinitis with a small benefit to those on antibiotics. Two studies found a significant benefit for antibiotics compared with placebo for runny nose (clear) odds ratio 0.42 (0.22-0.78). Two studies also found a significant benefit in patients with sore throat odds ratio 0.27 95% CI (0.10-0.74). Only one study reported work time lost with 22% of those on antibiotic treatment and 25% of those on placebo but this was not significant. Adult patients treated with antibiotics had a significant increase in adverse effects (odds ratio 3.6 95% CI 2.21 to 5.89) while there was no significant increase in children odds ratio 0.90 95% CI (0.44-1.82). REVIEWER'S
conclusionsREVIEWERS'
conclusionsThere is not enough evidence of important benefits from the treatment of upper respiratory tract infections with antibiotics to warrant their routine use in children or adults and there is a significant increase in adverse effects associated with antibiotic use in adult patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12137610What 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.