SynthesisLung2024
The Effect of Long-Term Azithromycin on Objective and Subjective Cough in Chronic Respiratory Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials and Noncomparative Studies.
Synthesis in Lung, 2024. 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.
- Mechanisms, Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacoeconomics of Low-Dose, Long-Term Macrolide Antibiotics in the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Review.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Review
- The Past, Present, and Future Care for Refractory Chronic Cough in Children and Adults.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- LUNG Year in Review: 2024.Lung · 2025Article
- Predicting response to neuromodulators in refractory chronic cough: An interpretable machine learning approach.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAzithromycin is an effective treatment for various respiratory conditions but its effect on cough is poorly understood. We synthesised data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and noncomparative studies (NCT) examining its effect on objective and subjective cough.
methodsAfter prospective registration on PROSPERO, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for both RCTs and NCT trials examining the effect azithromycin on cough in respiratory disease.
resultsWe identified 1240 studies of which 6 (4 RCTs and 2 NCT studies) were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 275 patients. Azithromycin was associated with significant improvement in Leicester Cough Questionnaire scores at follow-up when compared to baseline scores (SMD = 0.62 [95% CI 0.12 to 1.12], p = 0.01). However, when only RCTs were synthesised, no significant effect was observed (SMD = 0.12 [95% CI - 0.36 to 0.60], p = 0.62). There was no significant reduction in cough severity VAS score (SMD = - 0.39 [95% CI - 0.92 to 0.14], p = 0.15). There was no significant reduction in objective cough count (SMD = - 0.41 [95% CI - 1.04 to 0.32], p = 0.09).
conclusionAzithromycin therapy improves cough-related quality of life in various chronic respiratory diseases; however, there was no significant effect on cough outcomes when only data from RCTs were synthesised. We believe that to accurately identify which patients whose cough would benefit from azithromycin a large-scale clinical trial of patients with a broad spectrum of respiratory diseases, with sufficiently severe cough, should be undertaken with subgroup analysis of individual disease areas.
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.