ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2026
Secondary vancomycin prophylaxis during antibiotic re-exposure for the prevention of recurrent
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antibiotic re-exposure after an episode of Methods: We updated a recent systematic review search of MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid to 9 March 2026. RCTs of vancomycin during antibiotic re-exposure as secondary CDI prophylaxis were included. Quality was assessed by the Cochrane RoB2 tool. A Bayesian meta-analysis of 56-day rCDI was conducted on the odds ratio (OR) scale using a weakly informative prior. The probabilities of any benefit (i.e. OR < 1) and that the number needed to treat (NNT) was <20 (i.e. risk difference > 5%) were computed from the posterior. The 95% predictive interval (95% PI) was computed, which corresponds to the predicted range of the effect estimate of a future RCT. Results: Two RCTs at low risk of bias were included, which comprised 102 patients. The pooled OR was 0.61 [95% credible interval (95% CrI) = 0.27-1.40], which corresponded to a probability of any benefit with vancomycin prophylaxis of 88.0% and a probability that the NNT was <20 of 75.9%. The 95% PI was 0.19-2.00. Conclusions: Based on two small RCTs, there is a reasonable probability that secondary vancomycin prophylaxis during antibiotic re-exposure reduces 56-day rCDI. However, these results remain uncertain as the 95% PI is wide and consequently larger trials are needed.
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.