ReviewThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2023
Nitrofurantoin: what is the evidence for current UK guidance?
Review in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of human urinary microenvironment and fluid flow on antibiotic and phage therapy efficacy against uropathogenic Escherichia coli.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Understanding the Burden and Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Women.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Unlocking Nitrofurantoin: Understanding Molecular Mechanisms of Action and Resistance in Enterobacterales.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2025Review
- Improving nitrofurantoin resistance prediction inAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2024Article
- The Importance of Diagnostics in the Treatment of Urinary Tract Infections in the United Kingdom.Research and reports in urology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three days of nitrofurantoin at 100 mg twice daily is recommended as first-line treatment for uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) in evidence-based guidelines across the UK. A review of international guidelines shows that the evidence base has been interpreted in very different ways. UK guidelines are unusual in promoting short (3 day) courses, and we find little direct evidence to support this. Although 'short' courses of antibiotics for other agents may provide optimum balance between providing effective treatment whilst reducing selective pressure driving resistance amongst colonizing microbial flora, it remains unclear that course lengths can be extrapolated to nitrofurantoin. Three days of nitrofurantoin may indeed be a useful intervention in a large group of patients. However, without supporting evidence and because clinical response should be expected to vary widely, it is unclear that establishing and promoting an antibiotic duration for UTI is the best approach to optimizing prescribing in this important area.
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.