Evidence map›Paper›PMID 1323954›Full record

Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy1992

Efficacy and safety of temafloxacin versus those of amoxicillin in hospitalized adults with community-acquired pneumonia.

C Carbon, P Léophonte, P Petitpretz, J P Chauvin, J Hazebroucq

Abstract readClinical TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 1992. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C CarbonDepartment of Medicine, Hôpital Bichat, Paris, France.
P Léophonte
P Petitpretz
J P Chauvin
J Hazebroucq
Hôpital Bichat-Claude-Bernard · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Temafloxacin, a new fluoroquinolone, was compared with amoxicillin in the treatment of adult hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia. In this double-blind, multicenter study, patients were randomly assigned to treatment with temafloxacin at 600 mg twice daily (n = 125) or amoxicillin at 500 mg three times daily (n = 121); the average duration of treatment was 10 days. Clinical recovery rates were similar for patients treated with temafloxacin and amoxicillin (89 and 85%), as were bacterial eradication rates (99 and 97%). This was also true for subgroups of patients with pneumococcal pneumonia (n = 100), nonpneumococcal pneumonia (n = 122), or atypical pneumonia (n = 12). Outcomes for temafloxacin- and amoxicillin-treated patients were also similar in terms of defervescence, improvement in leukocytosis, and radiographic evidence of infection. The frequency and severity of adverse events were similar in both groups, consisting primarily of digestive disorders and skin manifestations. We conclude that temafloxacin may be recommended as an alternative antibacterial drug for patients with suspected pneumococcal pneumonia who fail to respond to benzylpenicillin or amoxicillin when the incidence of multiresistant pneumococcal strains is low. In countries where the incidence of these strains is high, temafloxacin may also be recommended.

Indexed as

FluoroquinolonesAdministration, OralAdultAgedAmoxicillinAnti-Infective AgentsBacteriaDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPneumoniaQuinolonesAmoxicillinAnti-Infective AgentsFluoroquinolonesQuinolonestemafloxacin

Identifiers

PMID1323954
PMCPMC189443
OpenAlexW2061549079

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.