ReviewEClinicalMedicine2024
Optimising antibiotic exposure by customising the duration of treatment for respiratory tract infections based on patient needs in primary care.
Review in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06581367 (Tailoring Antibiotic Duration for Respiratory Tract Infections in Primary Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Tailoring Antibiotic Duration for Respiratory Tract Infections in Primary Care: a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- DNA sequencing for microbial surveillance in cystic fibrosis airways: advances, challenges, and clinical translation.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2026Review
- Early antibiotic review and AWaRe prescribing in respiratory infections before vs during COVID-19: a two-hospital retrospective cohort study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
- Tailoring Antibiotic Duration for Respiratory Tract Infections in Primary Care: Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial Study (STORM).JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- The Changing Landscape of Antibiotic Treatment: Reevaluating Treatment Length in the Age of New Agents.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Duration of antibiotic treatment for respiratory tract infections in primary care.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2025Article
- Logistic Stewardship: Supporting Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs Based on Antibiotics Goods Flow.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Stop antibiotics when you feel better? Opportunities, challenges and research directions.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primary care antimicrobial stewardship programs have limited success in reducing antibiotic use, prompting the search for new strategies. Convincing general practitioners to resist antibiotic prescription amid uncertainty or patient demands usually poses a significant challenge. Despite common practice, standard durations for common infections lack support from clinical studies. Contrary to common belief, extending antibiotic treatment beyond the resolution of symptoms does not seem to prevent or reduce antimicrobial resistance. Shortening the duration of antibiotic therapy has shown to be effective in mitigating the spread of resistance, particularly in cases of pneumonia. Recent hospital randomised trials suggest that ending antibiotic courses by day three for most lower respiratory tract infections is effective and safe. While community studies are scarce, it is likely that these shorter, tailored courses to meet patients' needs would also be effective and safe in primary care. Therefore, primary care studies should investigate the outcomes of advising patients to discontinue antibiotic treatment upon symptom resolution. Implementing patient-centred, customised treatment durations, rather than fixed courses, is crucial for meeting individual patient needs.
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.