SynthesisFrontiers in pediatrics2026
Low-dose (0.15 mg/kg) versus high-dose (0.6 mg/kg) dexamethasone for pediatric croup: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of RCTs.
Synthesis in Frontiers in 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Systemic glucocorticoids are the standard treatment for croup. Although dexamethasone 0.6 mg/kg is widely recommended, lower doses may provide similar benefit. To compare oral dexamethasone low dose (0.15 mg/kg) to high dose (0.6 mg/kg) in children with croup. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to November 25, 2025. We restricted our analysis to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing low-dose vs high-dose oral dexamethasone in children with croup. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for binary outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed a random-effect meta-analysis for all outcomes using R software (version 2025.09.2+418). Results: Five RCTs were included, encompassing 1,058 patients, of whom 50% received low-dose dexamethasone and 50% received standard dose. We found no significant difference between doses for croup severity scores at 1hr, 3hr and 4hr (MD -0.05 points; 95% CI -0.37 to 0.27), (MD 0.00 points; 95% CI -0.42 to 0.42) and (MD -0.03 points; 95% CI -0.19 to 0.12) respectively, hospital admission (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.94), return to healthcare (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.67 to 1.64), and need for additional racemic epinephrine (RE) (RR 1.58; 95% CI 0.77 to 3.25). Discussion: In this meta-analysis, low-dose oral dexamethasone (0.15 mg/kg) was comparable to the traditional 0.6 mg/kg dose in children with mild to moderate croup, with similar clinical outcomes in croup severity scores at 4 hours, hospital admission, return to healthcare, and need for additional RE. However, trial sequential analysis suggests that the current evidence remains underpowered and inconclusive, as the required information size was not reached for key outcomes. The small number of available RCTs limited statistical power to detect modest differences in effect size. Although we sought to evaluate dose equivalence in children with more severe croup (baseline croup score >5), only three trials included this population, and outcome reporting was insufficiently standardized to allow a meaningful subgroup synthesis. These findings should not be extrapolated to children with severe croup, and adequately powered randomized trials are needed before definitive dosing recommendations can be made. Systematic Review Registration: identifier CRD420251238877.
Indexed as
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.