ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Real-world efficacy and safety of cefepime for pediatric community-acquired pneumonia: a propensity score-matched study.
Article 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.
- Cefepime-enmetazobactam for complicated urinary tract infections: Redefining ESBL therapy.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Review
- Comparative effectiveness of ertapenem versus other empirical antibiotics in elderly patients with complicated intra-abdominal infection: a real-world inverse probability of treatment weighting study.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the real-world clinical efficacy and safety of cefepime in treating pediatric community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), comparing it with other broad-spectrum antibiotics, including cefoperazone-sulbactam and meropenem, using a propensity score-matched design. Methods: A retrospective, propensity score-matched cohort study was conducted in pediatric patients (0-18 years) hospitalized with CAP. Patients treated with cefepime were compared to those treated with cefoperazone-sulbactam or meropenem. Clinical outcomes, microbiological clearance, and adverse events were assessed, and propensity score matching was applied to minimize confounding. Results: A total of 788 patients were included, with 720 in the cefepime group and 68 in the comparator group. Both groups showed comparable clinical efficacy, with no significant differences in symptom resolution, laboratory normalization, or radiographic improvement. Microbiological clearance rates were also similar between the groups. The incidence of adverse events was low in both groups, and no statistically significant difference in adverse events was observed between cefepime and the comparator group. Conclusion: Our results suggest that cefepime is a clinically effective and well-tolerated alternative to other broad-spectrum antibiotics for pediatric CAP, demonstrating comparable clinical outcomes and safety profiles. These findings support cefepime as a viable empiric therapy option, particularly in settings with limited microbiological diagnostics. Further studies are needed to confirm these results and optimize dosing strategies for pediatric populations.
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.