Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38360961›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2024

Identifying the Best Initial Oral Antibiotics for Adults with Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Peter K Kurotschka, Michelle Bentivegna, Cassie Hulme, Mark H Ebell

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Comparative Safety of Different Antibiotic Regimens for the Treatment of Outpatient Community-Acquired Pneumonia Among Otherwise Healthy Adults.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Microorganisms · 2025
    Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter K KurotschkaDepartment of General Practice, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Michelle BentivegnaDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Cassie HulmeDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Mark H EbellDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA. ebell@uga.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-3228-2877
University of Georgia · USUniversitätsklinikum Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this network meta-analysis was to compare rates of clinical response and mortality for empiric oral antibiotic regimens in adults with mild-moderate community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

methodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, and the reference lists of systematic reviews and clinical guidelines. We included randomized trials of adults with radiologically confirmed mild to moderate CAP initially treated orally and reporting clinical cure or mortality. Abstracts and studies were reviewed in parallel for inclusion in the analysis and for data abstraction. We performed separate analyses by antibiotic medications and antibiotic classes and present the results through network diagrams and forest plots sorted by p-scores. We assessed the quality of each study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias framework, as well as global and local inconsistency.

resultsWe identified 24 studies with 9361 patients: six at low risk of bias, six at unclear risk, and 12 at high risk. Nemonoxacin, levofloxacin, and telithromycin were most likely to achieve clinical response (p-score 0.79, 0.71, and 0.69 respectively), while penicillin and amoxicillin were least likely to achieve clinical response. Levofloxacin, nemonoxacin, azithromycin, and amoxicillin-clavulanate were most likely to be associated with lower mortality (p-score 0.85, 0.75, 0.74, and 0.68 respectively). By antibiotic class, quinolones and macrolides were most effective for clinical response (0.71 and 0.70 respectively), with amoxicillin-clavulanate plus macrolides and beta-lactams being less effective (p-score 0.11 and 0.22). Quinolones were most likely to be associated with lower mortality (0.63). All confidence intervals were broad and partially overlapping.

conclusionWe observed trends toward a better clinical response and lower mortality for quinolones as empiric antibiotics for CAP, but found no conclusive evidence of any antibiotic being clearly more effective than another. More trials are needed to inform guideline recommendations on the most effective antibiotic regimens for outpatients with mild to moderate CAP.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCommunity-Acquired InfectionsAdministration, OralAdultHumansPneumoniaPneumonia, BacterialRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agentsantibioticsclinical responsecommunity-acquired pneumoniaguidelinesmortalitynetwork meta-analysisoutpatientpneumonia

Identifiers

PMID38360961
PMCPMC11116361
OpenAlexW4391838787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.