Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26067232›Full record

SynthesisBMJ clinical evidence2015

Urinary tract infection in children: recurrent infections.

James Larcombe

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ clinical evidence, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on urinary tract infection recurrence in children Rapid review.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Sex effects in pyelonephritis.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2021
    Review
  17. Urinary Tract Infection in Children.Recent patents on inflammation & allergy drug discovery · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

1 author.

James LarcombeDurham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUp to 11% of girls and 7% of boys will have had a urinary tract infection (UTI) by the age of 16 years, and recurrence of infection is common. Vesicoureteric reflux (VUR) is identified in up to 40% of children being investigated for a first UTI, and is a risk factor for, but weak predictor of, renal parenchymal defects. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of prophylactic antibiotics to prevent recurrent urinary tract infection in children? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to December 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review).

resultsWe found three studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

conclusionsIn this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following intervention: prophylactic antibiotics.

Indexed as

Antibiotic ProphylaxisChildHumansRecurrenceUrinary Tract Infections

Identifiers

PMID26067232
PMCPMC4463760

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.