ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2024
Intermittent Versus Daily Trimethoprim/Sulfamethoxazole Regimens for
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prophylaxis Regimens forJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In immunocompromised individuals, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX) for Methods: This systematic review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Ichushi, or Embase databases, published from database inception to September 2023. The inclusion criteria were adults taking intermittent or daily TMP/SMX for PCP prophylaxis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The primary outcomes were PCP incidence, PCP-related mortality, and adverse events requiring temporary or permanent TMP/SMX discontinuation. Results: Four RCTs (N = 2808 patients) were included. PCP incidence did not differ significantly between the intermittent and daily regimen groups (risk ratio [RR], 1.17 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .89-1.53]; certainty: very low). There was no PCP-related mortality in the 3 RCTs reporting its outcome. Compared with the daily regimen group, the intermittent regimen group experienced significantly fewer adverse events requiring temporary or permanent TMP/SMX discontinuation (RR, 0.51 [95% CI, .42-.61]; certainty: low). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that intermittent TMP/SMX regimens for PCP prophylaxis may be more tolerable than daily regimens and may have similar efficacy. Further RCTs are needed to apply this to current practice.
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.