Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30670532›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Delayed antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections: protocol of an individual patient data meta-analysis.

Beth Stuart, Hilda Hounkpatin, Taeko Becque, Guiqing Yao, Shihua Zhu, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Attila Altiner, Bruce Arroll, Dankmar Böhning, Jennifer Bostock and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Post-consultation acute respiratory tract infection recovery: a latent class-informed analysis of individual patient data.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

22 authors.

Beth Stuart *Academic Unit of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Hilda Hounkpatin *Academic Unit of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Taeko BecqueAcademic Unit of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Guiqing YaoBiostatistics Research Group, Department of Health Sciences, College of Life Sciences, University of Leicester, Leiceister, UK.
Shihua ZhuAcademic Unit of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Pablo Alonso-CoelloIberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain.
Attila AltinerOffice for Educational Affairs, Department of General Medicine, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
Bruce ArrollDepartment of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Dankmar BöhningSouthampton Statistical Sciences Research Institute, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Jennifer BostockDivison of Health and Social Care Research, King's College London, London, UK.
Heiner C C BucherBasel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (CEB), University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Mariam de la PozaInstitut Català de la Salut, CAP Doctor Carles Ribas, Barcelona, Spain.
Nick A FrancisDivision of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
David GillespieCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical & Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Alastair D HayCentre for Academic Primary Care, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Timothy KenealyDepartment of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Christin LöfflerInstitute of General Practice, Rostock University Medical Center, Rostock, Germany.
Gemma Mas-DalmauKnowledge and Research Management Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain.
Laura MuñozAgència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya (AQuAS), Barcelona, Spain.
Kirsty SamuelASPIRE PPI Panel, Leeds, Institute for Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Michael MooreAcademic Unit of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Paul LittleAcademic Unit of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

Department of Health CDF-2009-02-10Department of Health PB-PG-0416-20005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDelayed prescribing can be a useful strategy to reduce antibiotic prescribing, but it is not clear for whom delayed prescribing might be effective. This protocol outlines an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies to explore the overall effect of delayed prescribing and identify key patient characteristics that are associated with efficacy of delayed prescribing. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic search of the databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL Plus and Web of Science was conducted to identify relevant studies from inception to October 2017. Outcomes of interest include duration of illness, severity of illness, complication, reconsultation and patient satisfaction. Study authors of eligible papers will be contacted and invited to contribute raw IPD data. IPD data will be checked against published data, harmonised and aggregated to create one large IPD database. Multilevel regression will be performed to explore interaction effects between treatment allocation and patient characteristics. The economic evaluation will be conducted based on IPD from the combined trial and observational studies to estimate the differences in costs and effectiveness for delayed prescribing compared with normal practice. A decision model will be developed to assess potential savings and cost-effectiveness in terms of reduced antibiotic usage of delayed prescribing and quality-adjusted life years. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: 30068). Findings of this study will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals as well as General Practice trade journals and will be presented at national and international conferences. The results will have important public health implications, shaping the way in which antibiotics are prescribed in the future and to whom delayed prescriptions are issued. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018079400.

Indexed as

Time-to-TreatmentAnti-Bacterial AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug Administration ScheduleDrug PrescriptionsHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicObservational Studies as TopicPatient SatisfactionQuality-Adjusted Life YearsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignRespiratory Tract InfectionsSystematic Reviews as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agentsgeneral medicinehealth economicsrespiratory medicinestatistics and research methods

Identifiers

PMID30670532
PMCPMC6347865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.