ReviewFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Investigating antibiotics in the NICU and patient safety.
Review in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Angel in the Marble: Antibiotic Duration in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Neonatology: First Exposure to Antibiotics from the Ethical Perspective of Parents, Physicians, and Regulators.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, a number of observational studies have been published in neonatology-focused journals that modify American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) evidence-based guidelines, as outlined in the Red Book and other publications authored by the AAP Committee on the Fetus and Newborn and the AAP Committee on Infectious Diseases, for the treatment of neonatal infectious diseases. Specifically, studies that decrease the treatment length or advocate for the early transition of intravenous to oral antibiotics in all neonates with suspected or culture-positive sepsis or pneumonia should be regarded with caution. These studies are usually conducted through quality improvement initiatives without informed parental consent, and lack well-defined definitions for the infection of interest. They often fail to include sufficient information regarding well-documented variations in gestational age-based immune responses, and usually combine bacterial infections into a single group without considering virulence and pathophysiologic differences between gram-negative and gram-positive infections. We seek to raise awareness of the potential harm these practices may cause and to advocate for parental involvement and consent when deviations from practice standards are investigated.
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.