Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40896455›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025

Antibiotic treatment of pediatric infections in primary healthcare setting: evaluation and comparison of 80 national treatment guidelines with the WHO AWaRe book recommendations.

Daniele Donà, Giulia Brigadoi, Anna Cantarutti, Giovanni Autore, Marco Masetti, Shrey Mathur, Mike Sharland, Susanna Esposito

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Daniele DonàDivision of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Department for Women's and Children's Health, University of Padua, Italy.
Giulia BrigadoiDivision of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Department for Women's and Children's Health, University of Padua, Italy.
Anna CantaruttiDivision of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, Laboratory of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Giovanni AutorePediatric Clinic, University Hospital, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Marco MasettiPediatric Clinic, University Hospital, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Shrey MathurAntibiotic Policy Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, City St George's, University of London, London, UK.
Mike SharlandAntibiotic Policy Group, Institute for Infection and Immunity, City St George's, University of London, London, UK.
Susanna EspositoPediatric Clinic, University Hospital, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Antibiotic recommendations for pediatric infections in national standard treatment guidelines (STGs) vary widely, particularly for Access and Watch antibiotics. The WHO AWaRe book recommends Access antibiotics as first-line treatment for over 80% of common infections managed in primary healthcare. This study aims to evaluate the agreement between first and second-line antibiotics in national STGs with AWaRe book recommendations and the inclusion of these antibiotics in Essential Medicine Lists (EMLs). Methods: National STGs of 80 countries were systematically collected from databases and grey literature (up to May 2025). Antibiotic recommendations for the ten most common primary healthcare infections in children were compared with the WHO AWaRe book (2022), the WHO Essential Medicines List for children (EMLc) and national Essential Medicines Lists (nEMLs) where available. Findings: A median of eight STGs per country were collected, with higher numbers in LMICs due to guidelines for cholera and enteric fever. A total of 1124 first-line and 841 second-line antibiotic recommendations were identified. Over 70% of first-line recommended treatments were Access antibiotics, while Watch antibiotics accounted for more than 50% of second-line recommended treatments. First-line recommendations showed strong agreement with WHO guidance, whereas second-line treatments exhibited lower agreement and greater variability across regions. More than 80% of first-line antibiotics were included in the EMLc and nEMLs, although some high-income countries lacked nEMLs. Interpretation: First-line antibiotic recommendations in national pediatric STGs largely align with the WHO AWaRe book guidance focusing on Access antibiotic use. In contrast, second-line treatments vary considerably, commonly recommending Watch antibiotics. Strengthening the evidence base of national STGs and aligning second-line recommendations with the WHO AWaRe book could help meet the 79th UNGA High-Level Meeting on AMR target, which aims for 70% of all human antibiotic use to come from the Access group. Funding: PRIN 2022 "A Cluster randomized clinical trial to change Antibiotic Prescribing behavior in Outpatient pediatric primary care setting in Italy (CAPO project)", funded in the framework of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), Mission 4, Component 2, Investment 1.1, funded by the European Union-Next Generation EU, Project 2022A7LA2W, CUP C53D23006050006.

Indexed as

AWaRe bookNational standard treatment guidelinesPediatric infectionsPrimary healthcare settingsSTGs

Identifiers

PMID40896455
PMCPMC12396473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.