ArticleCanada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada2022
Antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infection across a national primary care network in 2019.
Article in Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- National retrospective study of regional prescriber-specific variation in community antibiotic prescribing Canada, 2019-2023.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Understanding the impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic use in Canadian primary care: a matched-cohort study using EMR data.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2024Article
- Value in Primary Care: Evidence from the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2023Article
- Look-Back and Look-Forward Durations and the Apparent Appropriateness of Ambulatory Antibiotic Prescribing.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Respiratory tract infection (RTI) is the leading reason for avoidable antimicrobial use in primary care, yet provider-level feedback on its use is only available in some provinces. The aim of this study was to validate case definitions for RTI across the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) and determine baseline provider-level variability in antimicrobial prescribing in 2019. Methods: The RTI case definitions were developed using demographic, diagnostic coding and keywords in electronic medical record. Manual chart abstraction was performed to identify cases of acute otitis media. Remaining RTI definitions were validated using a random sample of 5,164 patients with encounters in 2019. The proportion of patients with an RTI treated with antibiotics was determined by provider, per patient, per episode and per patient encounter. Results: Negative predictive value, positive predictive value and prevalence were as follows: 1.00 (0.99-1.00), 0.99 (0.96-0.99) and 4.14% (4.10-4.19) for common cold; 1.00 (0.99-1.00), 0.94 (0.88-0.98) and 1.09% (1.07-1.12) for acute otitis media; 0.98 (0.96-1.00), 0.93 (0.87-0.97) and 1.2% (1.18-1.22) for acute pharyngitis; 0.99 (0.99-1.00), 0.88 (0.81-0.93) and 1.99% (1.96-2.02) for sinusitis; 0.99 (0.97-0.99), 0.95 (0.89-0.98) and 4.01% (3.97-4.05) for acute bronchitis/asthma. By provider, median (interquartile range [IQR]) proportion treated with antibiotics (per patient) was 6.72 (14.92) for common cold, 64.29 (40.00) for acute otitis media, 20.00 (38.89) for pharyngitis, 54.17 (38.09) for sinusitis, 8.33 (20.00) for acute bronchitis/asthma and 21.10 (20.56) for overall RTI. Conclusion: The CPCSSN can provide national surveillance of antimicrobial prescribing practices for RTI across primary care. Baseline variability underscores the need for provider feedback and quality improvement.
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.