ArticleIndian pediatrics2026
Methodology Adopted for the Development of Evidence-Based Guideline Recommendations on Childhood Empyema.
Article in Indian pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the methodology adopted for the development of evidence-based guideline recommendations for pediatricians managing childhood empyema.
methodsThe methodology followed contemporary methods for evidence-based guideline development. It included ten steps viz. (i) establishing a steering group (SG) and an evidence-based guideline development group (EBGDG), (ii) formal declarations of interest by EBGDG members, and scrutiny for conflicts by the SG, (iii) identifying and prioritizing questions in the PICOTS (Patient/population, Intervention/exposure, Comparison, Outcome, Time-frame, and Setting) format, (iv) building working teams to answer the questions, (v) searching for existing guidelines with potential for adaptation, adoption, or adolopment of recommendations, (vi) identifying existing systematic reviews addressing the prioritized questions, (vii) formal evidence synthesis (through systematic reviews) and critical appraisal of evidence for each question, (viii) drafting recommendation statements and formalizing them with strength and certainty of evidence, (ix) external peer review, and (x) preparation of the guideline document for dissemination.
resultsThe EBGDG collated 115 potential questions, narrowed them to 18 through the Delphi consensus-building process, and ultimately prioritized 11. The questions covered diverse aspects of empyema management including therapy options, microbiological and radiological investigations, and monitoring issues. There were no recent guidelines or systematic reviews addressing any of the 11 questions, thereby necessitating eleven de novo systematic reviews. The EBGDG examined the evidence from these reviews and certainty estimates, evaluated the criteria in the evidence-to-decision framework, and formulated evidence-based recommendation statements. The draft guideline underwent external peer review and finalization.
conclusionThe methodological rigor resulted in trustworthy recommendations for managing childhood empyema.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42096042What 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.