Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21412875›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011

Antibiotics for trachoma.

Jennifer R Evans, Anthony W Solomon

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antibiotics for trachoma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Interventions for trachoma trichiasis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  5. Face washing promotion for preventing active trachoma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Face washing promotion for preventing active trachoma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  8. Environmental sanitary interventions for preventing active trachoma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Antimicrobial Resistance Following Azithromycin Mass Drug Administration: Potential Surveillance Strategies to Assess Public Health Impact.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer R EvansCochrane Eyes and Vision Group, ICEH, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK, WC1E 7HT.
Anthony W Solomon
Cochrane · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrachoma is the world's leading infectious cause of blindness. In 1997 the World Health Organization (WHO) launched an Alliance for the Global Elimination of Trachoma by the year 2020, based on the 'SAFE' strategy (surgery, antibiotics, facial cleanliness and environmental improvement).

objectivesTo assess the evidence supporting the antibiotic arm of the SAFE strategy by assessing the effects of antibiotics on both active trachoma (primary objective) and on Chlamydia trachomatis (C. trachomatis) infection of the conjunctiva (secondary objective). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 11), MEDLINE (January 1950 to December 2010), EMBASE (January 1980 to December 2010), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com) (December 2010) and ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) (December 2010). We used the Science Citation Index to look for articles that cited the included studies. We searched the reference lists of identified articles and we contacted authors and experts for details of further relevant studies. There were no language or date restrictions in the search for trials. The electronic databases were last searched on 12 December 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials that satisfied either of two criteria: (a) trials in which topical or oral administration of an antibiotic was compared to placebo or no treatment in people or communities with trachoma, (b) trials in which a topical antibiotic was compared with an oral antibiotic in people or communities with trachoma. A subdivision of particular interest was trials in which topical tetracycline or chlortetracycline and oral azithromycin were compared with each other, or in which one of these treatments was compared with placebo or no treatment, as these are the two WHO recommended antibiotics. We considered individually randomised and cluster-randomised trials separately. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted investigators for missing data. Where appropriate, the effect estimates from the individual studies (risk ratios) were pooled using a random-effects model. MAIN

resultsA total of 14 trials randomised individuals with trachoma to oral antibiotic, topical antibiotic, both, or control (no treatment or placebo) and were eligible for inclusion in this review (n = 3587). Overall, the quality of the evidence provided from these trials was low. Nine of the trials compared antibiotic treatment to control. Most of the studies found a beneficial effect of treatment on active trachoma and ocular chlamydial infection at three and 12 months follow up. There was considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity between trials, which meant that it was difficult to reliably estimate the size of the treatment effect. It is likely to be in the region of a 20% relative risk reduction. Seven of the 14 trials compared the effectiveness of oral and topical antibiotics. There was no consistent evidence as to whether oral or topical antibiotics were more effective, although one trial suggested that a single dose of oral azithromycin was significantly more effective than unsupervised use of topical tetracyclineA further eight trials assessed the effectiveness of community-based treatment. In five trials antibiotic treatment was compared to no (or delayed) treatment (57 communities), and in three trials oral antibiotic was compared to topical treatment (12 communities). The quality of the evidence provided by these trials was variable but at least one trial was considered to provide high quality evidence. There was evidence that community-based antibiotic treatment reduced the prevalence of active trachoma and ocular infection 12 months after single-dose treatment. There was some evidence that oral azithromycin was more effective than topical tetracycline as a community treatment. Data on adverse effects were not consistently reported however there were no reported serious adverse events associated with treatment with oral azithromycin or topical tetracycline; in one sample survey of 671 people treated with azithromycin between 10% and 15% experienced gastrointestinal adverse effects (nausea or vomiting, or both). AUTHORS'

conclusionsAntibiotic treatment reduces the risk of active trachoma and ocular chlamydial infection in people infected with C. trachomatis, but we do not know for certain the size of the treatment effect in individuals. Mass antibiotic treatment with single-dose oral azithromycin reduces the prevalence of active trachoma and ocular infection in communities.

Indexed as

Chlamydia trachomatisAdministration, OralAdministration, TopicalAnti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTetracyclineTrachomaAnti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinTetracycline

Identifiers

PMID21412875
OpenAlexW1559229543

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.