ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2019
Efficacy and Safety of Ceftaroline for the Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- ASP-COMPLEX: redefining antimicrobial stewardship to improve outcomes in high-risk patients with severe infections.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026Review
- Antimicrobial resistance among agents of community-associated lower respiratory tract infection in the UK and Ireland: trends from 1999/2000 to 2018/2019.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025Article
- New Antimicrobials for the Treatment of Neonatal Sepsis Caused by Multi-Drug-Resistant Bacteria: A Systematic Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Antibiotic Treatment of Pulmonary Infections: An Umbrella Review and Evidence Map.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- New cephalosporins for the treatment of pneumonia in internal medicine wards.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- 2019 Community-acquired Pneumonia Treatment Guidelines: There Is a Need for a Change toward More Parsimonious Antibiotic Use.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2020Article
- Epidemiology, Treatment, and Prevention of Nosocomial Bacterial Pneumonia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Spotlight on New Antibiotics for the Treatment of Pneumonia.Clinical medicine insights. Circulatory, respiratory and pulmonary medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of ceftaroline with those of ceftriaxone for treating community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and clinicalTrials.gov databases were searched until April 2019. This meta-analysis only included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated ceftaroline and ceftriaxone for the treatment of CAP. The primary outcome was the clinical cure rate, and the secondary outcome was the risk of adverse events (AEs). Five RCTs were included. Overall, at the test of cure (TOC), the clinical cure rate of ceftaroline was superior to the rates of ceftriaxone for the treatment of CAP (modified intent-to-treat population (MITT) population, odds ratio (OR) 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31-1.99,
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.