Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21833949›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011

Antibiotics for preventing meningococcal infections.

Anca Zalmanovici Trestioreanu, Abigail Fraser, Anat Gafter-Gvili, Mical Paul, Leonard Leibovici

Abstract 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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antibiotics for preventing meningococcal infections.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  2. Progression of antibiotic resistance inClinical microbiology reviews · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Meningococcal Vaccinations.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2016
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Anca Zalmanovici TrestioreanuDepartment of Family Medicine, Beilinson Campus, Rabin Medical Center, 39 Jabotinski Street, Petah Tikva, Israel, 49100.
Abigail Fraser
Anat Gafter-Gvili
Mical Paul
Leonard Leibovici
Rabin Medical Center · ILArthur M. Sackler Gallery · USUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMeningococcal disease is a contagious bacterial infection caused by Neisseria meningitidis (N. meningitidis). Household contacts have the highest risk of contracting the disease during the first week of a case being detected. Prophylaxis is considered for close contacts of people with a meningococcal infection and populations with known high carriage rates.

objectivesTo study the effectiveness of different prophylactic treatment regimens. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2011, Issue 2) which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE (January 1966 to May Week 3, 2011), EMBASE (1980 to May 2011) and LILACS (1982 to May 2011). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs addressing the effectiveness of different antibiotics for: (a) prophylaxis against meningococcal disease; (b) eradication of N. meningitidis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently appraised the quality and extracted data from the included trials. We analysed dichotomous data by calculating the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each trial. MAIN

resultsWe included 24 studies; 19 including 2531 randomised participants and five including 4354 cluster-randomised participants. There were no cases of meningococcal disease during follow up in the trials, thus effectiveness regarding prevention of future disease cannot be directly assessed.Ciprofloxacin (RR 0.04; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.12), rifampin (rifampicin) (RR 0.17; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.24), minocycline (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.37) and penicillin (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.94) proved effective at eradicating N. meningitidis one week after treatment when compared with placebo. Rifampin (RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.29), ciprofloxacin (RR 0.03; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.42) and penicillin (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.79) still proved effective at one to two weeks. Rifampin was effective compared to placebo up to four weeks after treatment but resistant isolates were seen following prophylactic treatment. No trials evaluated ceftriaxone against placebo but ceftriaxone was more effective than rifampin after one to two weeks of follow up (RR 5.93; 95% CI 1.22 to 28.68). Mild adverse events associated with treatment were observed. AUTHORS'

conclusionsUsing rifampin during an outbreak may lead to the circulation of resistant isolates. Use of ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone or penicillin should be considered. All four agents were effective for up to two weeks follow up, though more trials comparing the effectiveness of these agents for eradicating N. meningitidis would provide important insights.

Indexed as

AmpicillinAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftriaxoneCiprofloxacinHumansMeningococcal InfectionsMinocyclineNeisseria meningitidisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRifampinAmpicillinAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftriaxoneCiprofloxacinMinocyclineRifampin

Identifiers

PMID21833949
OpenAlexW4241410339

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.