SynthesisJournal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society2018
Treatment of Neonatal Chlamydial Conjunctivitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2021Guideline
- Article
- Review
- Neonatologists' Challenges During COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2020Article
- Review
- Conjunctivitis: A Systematic Review.Journal of ophthalmic & vision researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith the continued high prevalence of chlamydia worldwide and high risk of transfer from mothers to their infant during delivery, a need for safe and effective therapies for infants who acquire a chlamydial infection remains. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of antibiotic treatments, including oral erythromycin, azithromycin, and trimethoprim, for neonatal chlamydial conjunctivitis.
methodsWe searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from their inception to July 14, 2017. We included randomized and nonrandomized studies that evaluated the effects of erythromycin, azithromycin, or trimethoprim in neonates with chlamydial conjunctivitis. A meta-analysis using a random-effects generic inverse-variance method was performed, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
resultsWe found 12 studies (n = 292 neonates) and were able to meta-analyze 7 studies that used erythromycin at a dose of 50 mg/kg body weight per day for 14 days. The clinical and microbiological cure were 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94%-100%) and 97% (95% CI, 95%-99%), respectively, and adverse gastrointestinal effects occurred in 14% (95% CI, 1%-28%) of the neonates. The microbiological cure in the study that assessed azithromycin at 20 mg/kg per day were 60% (95% CI, 27%-93%) when it was given in a single dose and 86% (95% CI, 61%-100%) when given in a 3-day course. Two studies reported compliance with treatments, and 1 study reported no pyloric stenosis events. Because of the risk of bias and the few neonates included across the studies, the certainty of evidence is low to very low. No studies assessed trimethoprim.
conclusionsAlthough evidence suggests that erythromycin at 50 mg/kg per day for 14 days results in higher numbers of cure than does azithromycin, compliance and risk of pyloric stenosis related to their use for other infections in neonates will factor into treatment recommendations. More data are needed to compare these treatments directly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.