Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34205440›Full record

ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Antimicrobial Use in COVID-19 Patients in the First Phase of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: A Scoping Review.

Wenjuan Cong, Ak Narayan Poudel, Nour Alhusein, Hexing Wang, Guiqing Yao, Helen Lambert

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Wenjuan CongDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5034-8182
Ak Narayan PoudelDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.
Nour AlhuseinDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
Hexing WangKey Laboratory of Public Health Safety of Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China.
Guiqing YaoDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.
Helen LambertDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2506-6316
University of Bristol · GBUniversity of Leicester · GBFudan University · CN

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S013717/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This scoping review provides new evidence on the prevalence and patterns of global antimicrobial use in the treatment of COVID-19 patients; identifies the most commonly used antibiotics and clinical scenarios associated with antibiotic prescribing in the first phase of the pandemic; and explores the impact of documented antibiotic prescribing on treatment outcomes in COVID-19 patients. The review complies with PRISMA guidelines for Scoping Reviews and the protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework. In the first six months of the pandemic, there was a similar mean antibiotic prescribing rate between patients with severe or critical illness (75.4%) and patients with mild or moderate illness (75.1%). The proportion of patients prescribed antibiotics without clinical justification was 51.5% vs. 41.9% for patients with mild or moderate illness and those with severe or critical illness. Comparison of patients who were provided antibiotics with a clinical justification with those who were given antibiotics without clinical justification showed lower mortality rates (9.5% vs. 13.1%), higher discharge rates (80.9% vs. 69.3%), and shorter length of hospital stay (9.3 days vs. 12.2 days). In the first 6 months of the pandemic, antibiotics were prescribed for COVID-19 patients regardless of severity of illness. A large proportion of antibiotic prescribing for mild and moderate COVID-19 patients did not have clinical evidence of a bacterial co-infection. Antibiotics may not be beneficial to COVID-19 patients without clinical evidence of a bacterial co-infection.

Indexed as

antibiotic useclinical justificationCOVID-19 patientsdisease severitysecondary infections

Identifiers

PMID34205440
PMCPMC8235357
OpenAlexW3175432839

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.