Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41790446›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2026

Ethics of Antibiotic Course Duration: Shorter is Better.

Tess Johnson, George S Heriot, Euzebiusz Jamrozik

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tess JohnsonEthox Centre University of Oxford.ORCID 0000-0003-2071-4302
George S HeriotUniversity of Melbourne.ORCID 0000-0002-5337-5944
Euzebiusz JamrozikEthox Centre University of Oxford.ORCID 0000-0001-5940-602X

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibiotic treatment course duration has for decades been dictated by two questionable ideas: first, that longer courses are more effective at curing bacterial infections; second, that longer courses are less likely to lead to drug resistance. Recently, the "shorter is better" movement has challenged the received wisdom, showing shorter-duration antibiotic courses provide similar cure rates, fewer antibiotic-related harms, and possibly less contribution to of antibiotic resistance for common infections. Yet, physicians typically still prescribe longer courses of antibiotics than clinical guidelines recommend. This is ethically unacceptable. In this paper, we argue that prescribing physicians are ethically obligated to prescribe shorter antibiotic courses, given that prescribing physicians bear duties both toward their patients and to protect public health. We rebut objections to our argument and furthermore argue for an ethical obligation of physician-researchers to conduct further trials comparing the shortest current evidence-based course of antibiotics with courses that are even shorter.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsDuration of TherapyPractice Patterns, Physicians'Drug Administration ScheduleEthics, MedicalHumansAnti-Bacterial Agentsantibioticsdrug resistanceevidence-based medicineMedical ethicsprescription duration

Identifiers

PMID41790446
PMCPMC7619178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.