ArticleGMS infectious diseases2026
Proposed guidelines on the evaluation of non-antibiotic versus antibiotic agents indicated for treatment of uncomplicated acute cystitis in adult female patients.
Article in GMS infectious diseases, 2026. 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.
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
Since several current clinical guidelines also recommend non-antibiotic therapy of uncomplicated acute cystitis (uAC) in women, research guidelines are needed on conducting clinical trials to demonstrate their efficacy compared to e.g. standard antibiotic therapy. As the mechanism of action of antibiotic and non-antibiotic therapy is different, clinical outcome in such comparative trials must be the main criteria, although the effect of microbiological outcomes on clinical outcome may also be considered. The research guidelines proposed here are adjusted to the current guidelines recommended by the European Medicines Agency (EMA, 2022) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA, 2019), using in addition a patient self-reporting questionnaire already clinically validated in many languages for diagnostics of uAC and as a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) with well-defined thresholds for successful and non-successful clinical outcome. These adapted guidelines could be used in prospective clinical studies comparing e.g. antibacterial and non-antibacterial products for the treatment of women suffering from uAC.
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.