SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2006
Comparison of European and U.S. results for cephalosporin versus penicillin treatment of group A streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cefdinir for recent-onset pediatric neuropsychiatric disorders: a pilot randomized trial.Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology · 2015Trial
- Cephalosporins: A Focus on Side Chains and β-Lactam Cross-Reactivity.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- [Consensus document on the diagnosis and treatment of acute tonsillopharyngitis].Anales de pediatria (Barcelona, Spain : 2003) · 2011Article
- Optimizing the management of the main acute infections in pediatric ORL: tonsillitis, sinusitis, otitis media.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The outcome of cephalosporin versus penicillin treatment of group A streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis may differ between Europe and the USA. In the present study, Medline, Embase, reference lists, and abstract searches were used to identify randomized, controlled trials of cephalosporin versus penicillin treatment of group A streptococcal (GAS) tonsillopharyngitis. The outcomes of interest were bacteriologic and clinical cure rates from investigations conducted in Europe versus those conducted in the USA. Forty-seven trials involving 11,426 patients were included in the meta-analyses. For the comparison of 10 days of treatment with cephalosporins versus 10 days of treatment with penicillin, there were ten European and 25 U.S. trials, all involving pediatric subjects. The overall odds ratio (OR) favored cephalosporins more strongly in bacteriologic cure rate in Europe (OR=4.27, p<0.00001) than in the USA (OR=2.70, p<0.00001). Studies of 4-5 days of cephalosporin treatment versus 10 days of penicillin treatment were also analyzed. For nine European trials, the OR significantly favored cephalosporins (OR=1.30, p=0.03) in bacteriologic cure rates, but not as strongly as in the USA, (OR=2.41, p<0.00001). When results for 4-5 days of cephalosporin treatment were divided into pediatric versus adult populations, the differences in bacteriologic eradication rates obtained with cephalosporins were more pronounced in children. The likelihood of bacteriologic and clinical failure of GAS tonsillopharyngitis treatment in both European and U.S. patients is significantly less if a 10-day course of oral cephalosporin is prescribed, and is at least similar, if not significantly less, with a 4- to 5-day course of oral cephalosporin compared with a 10-day course of oral penicillin.
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.