Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20091606›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Antibiotic therapy for Shigella dysentery.

Prince Christopher R H, Kirubah V David, Sushil M John, Venkatesan Sankarapandian

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Cryo-EM reveals thatProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. The consequences ofEClinicalMedicine · 2026
    Article
  4. Clinical outcomes of carbapenem vs. non-carbapenem therapy in hospitalized adults with shigellosis.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026
    Article
  5. Bacteremic vs NonbacteremicOpen forum infectious diseases · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. An update on vaccines against Shigella.Therapeutic advances in vaccines · 2013
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Prince Christopher R HFamily Medicine, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamilnadu, India, 632004.
Kirubah V David
Sushil M John
Venkatesan Sankarapandian
Christian Medical College · INChristian Medical College & Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShigella dysentery is a relatively common illness and occasionally causes death, worldwide. Mild symptoms are self-limiting but in more severe cases, antibiotics are recommended for cure and preventing relapse. The antibiotics recommended are diverse, have regional differences in sensitivity, and have side effects.

objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of antibiotics for treating Shigella dysentery. SEARCH STRATEGY: In June 2009 we identified all relevant trials from the following databases: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, issue 4), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT). We also checked conference proceedings for relevant abstracts, and contacted researchers, organizations, and pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials of antibiotics for Shigella dysentery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four authors, working in pairs, independently assessed trial eligibility, methodological quality, and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data, and used the random-effects model for significant heterogeneity. We explored possible sources of heterogeneity, when present, in subgroup analyses of participant age and percentage of participants with confirmed Shigella infection. MAIN

resultsSixteen trials (1748 participants), spanning four decades and with differing sensitivity to Shigella isolates, met the inclusion criteria. Seven were judged to be at risk of bias due to inadequate allocation concealment or blinding, and 12 due to incomplete reporting of outcome data. Limited data from one three-armed trial of people with moderately severe illness suggest that antibiotics reduce the episodes of diarrhoea at follow-up (furazolidone versus no drug RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.48, 73 participants; cotrimoxazole versus no drug RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.59, 76 participants).There was insufficient evidence to consider any class of antibiotic superior in efficacy in treating Shigella dysentery, but heterogeneity for some comparisons limits confidence in the results. All the antibiotics studied were safe. There was inadequate evidence regarding the role of antibiotics in preventing relapses. AUTHORS'

conclusionsAntibiotics reduce the duration of Shigella dysentery.Regularly updated local or regional antibiotic sensitivity patterns to different species and strains of Shigella are required to guide empiric therapy. More trials adhering to standard guidelines are required to evaluate the role of antibiotics in the treatment of severe forms of Shigella dysentery and in groups who are at high risk of complications.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDysentery, BacillaryHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID20091606
OpenAlexW4211067836

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.