SynthesisInternational ophthalmology2025
The public health impact of making chloramphenicol an over-the-counter antibiotic: a systematic literature review.
Synthesis in International ophthalmology, 2025. 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.
- A Dual Quantum Dot Fluorescent Probe for Time-Resolved Chemometric Detection of Chloramphenicolin Pharmaceuticals.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
purposeChloramphenicol is an over-the-counter ocular antibiotic in some countries (for example Australia since 2010 and the United Kingdom since 2005), but concerns regarding resistance and adverse effects have prevented other countries from doing the same. Therefore, this systematic review was conducted to answer the question of whether chloramphenicol is a safe and effective topical antibiotic for treating ocular infections, and whether it should be reclassified as an over-the-counter medication.
methodsA search of the Medline and Embase databases was conducted to identify articles concerning the effectiveness of chloramphenicol in treating ocular infections, bacterial susceptibility towards chloramphenicol, the risk of adverse effects, and the results of reclassifying chloramphenicol as an over-the-counter antibiotic in the past. A total of 131 articles were evaluated for this systematic review.
resultsThe literature did not support any concerns regarding side effects such as aplastic anaemia. Chloramphenicol was comparable in efficacy to other antibiotics in treating ocular infections, and resistance has remained low over the past decade, save for bacterial species with known intrinsic resistance such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Chloramphenicol use increased in the first few years following reclassification as an over-the-counter medication, but eventually plateaued.
conclusionChloramphenicol is a safe and effective topical antibiotic for treating ocular infections, and there is minimal concern of adverse effects such as aplastic anaemia resulting from topical use. Nonetheless, multiple clinical and socioeconomic factors should be factored in when considering reclassification, and contextual factors such as population density, eye care accessibility and health-seeking behaviours may influence the decision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41160219What 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.