Trial reportEBioMedicine2022
Effect of intra-partum azithromycin on the development of the infant nasopharyngeal microbiota: A post hoc analysis of a double-blind randomized trial.
Trial report in EBioMedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The efficacy of a single dose of oral azithromycin in labour to prevent infections in infants and birthing parents in Fiji: secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial.BMJ global health · 2026Trial
- Effect of intrapartum azithromycin on early childhood gut mycobiota development: post hoc analysis of a double-blind randomized trial.Nature communications · 2025Trial
- Perinatal exposures and upper respiratory tract microbiome composition are associated with age at first acute otitis media episode.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Current state of microbiota clinical applications in neonatal and pediatric bacterial infections.Gut microbes · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSepsis is a leading cause of neonatal death. Intrapartum azithromycin reduces neonatal nasopharyngeal carriage of potentially pathogenic bacteria, a prerequisite for sepsis. Early antibiotic exposure has been associated with microbiota perturbations with varying effects. This study aims to understand the effect of intrapartum azithromycin intervention on the developing nasopharyngeal microbiota of the child.
methodsUsing 16S rRNA gene sequencing, we analysed the microbiota of 343 nasopharyngeal samples collected from birth to 12 months from 109 healthy infants selected from a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted in the Gambia (PregnAnZI-1). In the trial, 829 women were given 2g oral azithromycin or placebo (1:1) during labour with the objective of reducing bacterial carriage in mother and child during the neonatal period. The post-hoc analysis presented here assessed the effect of the intervention on the child nasopharyngeal microbiota development.
findings55 children were from mothers given azithromycin and 54 from mothers given placebo. Comparing arms, we found an increase in alpha-diversity at day-6 (p = 0·018), and a significant effect on overall microbiota composition at days 6 and 28 (R
interpretationThese results indicate that intrapartum azithromycin caused short-term alterations in the nasopharyngeal microbiota with modest overall effect at 12 months of age. Further exploration of the effects of these variations on microbiome function will give more insight on the potential risks and benefits, for the child, associated with this intervention.
fundingThis work was jointly funded by the Medical Research Council (UK) (MC_EX_MR/J010391/1/MRC), Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1196513), and MRCG@LSHTM Doctoral Training Program.
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.