Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32820536›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020

Antibiotic therapy for pelvic inflammatory disease.

Ricardo F Savaris, Daniele G Fuhrich, Jackson Maissiat, Rui V Duarte, Jonathan Ross

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Antibiotic therapy for pelvic inflammatory disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Antibiotic therapy for pelvic inflammatory disease: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ricardo F SavarisGinecologia e Obstetricia, UFRGS-FAMED, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Daniele G FuhrichGinecologia e Obstetricia, UFRGS-FAMED, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Jackson MaissiatSchool of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Rui V DuarteLiverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Jonathan RossDepartment of G U Medicine, The Whittall Street Clinic, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPelvic inflammatory disease (PID) affects 4% to 12% of women of reproductive age. The main intervention for acute PID is broad-spectrum antibiotics administered intravenously, intramuscularly or orally. We assessed the optimal treatment regimen for PID. 

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic regimens to treat PID. SEARCH

methodsIn January 2020, we searched the Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infections Review Group's Specialized Register, which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 1944 to 2020, located through hand and electronic searching; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; four other databases; and abstracts in selected publications. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs comparing antibiotics with placebo or other antibiotics for the treatment of PID in women of reproductive age, either as inpatient or outpatient treatment. We limited our review to a comparison of drugs in current use that are recommended by the 2015 US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for treatment of PID. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and conducted GRADE assessments of the quality of evidence. MAIN

resultsWe included 39 RCTs (6894 women) in this review, adding two new RCTs at this update. The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to high, the main limitations being serious risk of bias (due to poor reporting of study methods and lack of blinding), serious inconsistency, and serious imprecision. None of the studies reported quinolones and cephalosporins, or the outcomes laparoscopic evidence of resolution of PID based on physician opinion or fertility outcomes. Length of stay results were insufficiently reported for analysis. Regimens containing azithromycin versus regimens containing doxycycline We are uncertain whether there was a clinically relevant difference between azithromycin and doxycycline in rates of cure for mild-moderate PID (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.55; 2 RCTs, 243 women; I AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe are uncertain whether one treatment was safer or more effective than any other for the cure of mild-moderate or severe PID Based on a single study at a low risk of bias, a macrolide (azithromycin) probably improves the rates of cure of mild-moderate PID, compared to tetracycline (doxycycline).

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAminoglycosidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinCephalosporinsClindamycinDoxycyclineDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHumansNitroimidazolesPelvic Inflammatory DiseasePublication BiasQuinolonesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAminoglycosidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinCephalosporinsClindamycinDoxycyclineNitroimidazolesQuinolones

Identifiers

PMID32820536
PMCPMC8094882

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.