Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2023
Multi-faceted intervention to improve management of antibiotics for children presenting to primary care with acute cough and respiratory tract infection (CHICO): efficient cluster randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital patient safety interventions in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of a comprehensive antibiotic stewardship program on antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in rural facilities: a cluster randomized trial.Nature medicine · 2026Trial
- Implementation of the CHIldren with acute COugh (CHICO) intervention to improve antibiotics management: a qualitative study in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Trial
- Review
- Effects of the Nudge Theory-Based Multifaceted Intervention on Reducing Inappropriate Proton Pump Inhibitors Use for Prophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients: A Non-Randomized Controlled Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- A systematic review on how primary care electronic medical record data have been used for antimicrobial stewardship.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Review
- A complex intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing in rural China: a cluster randomised controlled trial.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024Article
- Adapting power calculations to include a superiority margin: what are the implications?Biochemia medica · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess whether an easy-to-use multifaceted intervention for children presenting to primary care with respiratory tract infections would reduce antibiotic dispensing, without increasing hospital admissions for respiratory tract infection.
designTwo arm randomised controlled trial clustered by general practice, using routine outcome data, with qualitative and economic evaluations.
settingEnglish primary care practices using the EMIS electronic medical record system.
participantsChildren aged 0-9 years presenting with respiratory tract infection at 294 general practices, before and during the covid-19 pandemic.
interventionElicitation of parental concerns during consultation; a clinician focused prognostic algorithm to identify children at very low, normal, or elevated 30 day risk of hospital admission accompanied by antibiotic prescribing guidance; and a leaflet for carers including safety netting advice.
main outcome measuresRate of dispensed amoxicillin and macrolide antibiotics (superiority comparison) and hospital admissions for respiratory tract infection (non-inferiority comparison) for children aged 0-9 years over 12 months (same age practice list size as denominator).
resultsOf 310 practices needed, 294 (95%) were randomised (144 intervention and 150 controls) representing 5% of all registered 0-9 year olds in England. Of these, 12 (4%) subsequently withdrew (six owing to the pandemic). Median intervention use per practice was 70 (by a median of 9 clinicians). No evidence was found that antibiotic dispensing differed between intervention practices (155 (95% confidence interval 138 to 174) items/year/1000 children) and control practices (157 (140 to 176) items/year/1000 children) (rate ratio 1.011, 95% confidence interval 0.992 to 1.029; P=0.25). Pre-specified subgroup analyses suggested reduced dispensing in intervention practices with fewer prescribing nurses, in single site (compared with multisite) practices, and in practices located in areas of lower socioeconomic deprivation, which may warrant future investigation. Pre-specified sensitivity analysis suggested reduced dispensing among older children in the intervention arm (P=0.03). A post hoc sensitivity analysis suggested less dispensing in intervention practices before the pandemic (rate ratio 0.967, 0.946 to 0.989; P=0.003). The rate of hospital admission for respiratory tract infections in the intervention practices (13 (95% confidence interval 10 to 18) admissions/1000 children) was non-inferior compared with control practices (15 (12 to 20) admissions/1000 children) (rate ratio 0.952, 0.905 to 1.003).
conclusionsThis multifaceted antibiotic stewardship intervention for children with respiratory tract infections did not reduce overall antibiotic dispensing or increase respiratory tract infection related hospital admissions. Evidence suggested that in some subgroups and situations (for example, under non-pandemic conditions) the intervention slightly reduced prescribing rates but not in a clinically relevant way.
trial registrationISRCTN11405239ISRCTN registry ISRCTN11405239.
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.