Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29790842›Full record

SynthesisPaediatrics and international child health2018

Reviewing the WHO guidelines for antibiotic use for sepsis in neonates and children.

Aline Fuchs, Julia Bielicki, Shrey Mathur, Mike Sharland, Johannes N Van Den Anker

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Paediatrics and international child health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

83 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Pharmacological assessment of drugs retained in the 1Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Ups and downs in the experimental treatment of murine typhoid fever using gentamicin combined with caffeine.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Aline Fuchsa Paediatric Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics , University Children's Hospital Basel , Basel , Switzerland.
Julia Bielickia Paediatric Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics , University Children's Hospital Basel , Basel , Switzerland.
Shrey Mathurb Paediatric Infectious Disease Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity , St George's University of London , London , UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2809-8244
Mike Sharlandb Paediatric Infectious Disease Research Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity , St George's University of London , London , UK.
Johannes N Van Den Ankera Paediatric Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics , University Children's Hospital Basel , Basel , Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Guidelines from 2005 for treating suspected sepsis in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) recommended hospitalisation and prophylactic intramuscular (IM) or intravenous (IV) ampicillin and gentamicin. In 2015, recommendations when referral to hospital is not possible suggest the administration of IM gentamicin and oral amoxicillin. In an era of increasing antimicrobial resistance, an updated review of the appropriate empirical therapy for treating sepsis (taking into account susceptibility patterns, cost and risk of adverse events) in neonates and children is necessary. Methods Systematic literature review and international guidelines were used to identify published evidence regarding the treatment of (suspected) sepsis. Results Five adequately designed and powered studies comparing antibiotic treatments in a low-risk community in neonates and young infants in LMIC were identified. These addressed potential simplifications of the current WHO treatment of reference, for infants for whom admission to inpatient care was not possible. Research is lacking regarding the treatment of suspected sepsis in neonates and children with hospital-acquired sepsis, despite rising antimicrobial resistance rates worldwide. Conclusions Current WHO guidelines supporting the use of gentamicin and penicillin for hospital-based patients or gentamicin (IM) and amoxicillin (oral) when referral to a hospital is not possible are in accordance with currently available evidence and other international guidelines, and there is no strong evidence to change this. The benefit of a cephalosporin alone or in combination as a second-line therapy in regions with known high rates of non-susceptibility is not well established. Further research into hospital-acquired sepsis in neonates and children is required.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdolescentAmoxicillinAnti-Bacterial AgentsChildChild, PreschoolGentamicinsGuidelines as TopicHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInjections, IntramuscularInpatientsOutpatientsPenicillinsSepsisAmoxicillinAnti-Bacterial AgentsGentamicinsPenicillinsantibioticsantimicrobial resistanceSepsistreatment guidelines

Identifiers

PMID29790842
PMCPMC6176768

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.