Evidence Hub

Evaluating Short-Course Antibiotic Therapy for Pediatric Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

E. Bolormaa, C. Kang, Young June Choe, Young Yoo, J. Lee, Ji Young Park, S. Choe, G. Tansarli et al.

The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, 2025

155,944 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The optimal duration of antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in children remains uncertain. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether short-course antibiotic therapy (≤6 days) is associated with poor clinical outcomes compared with long-course antibiotic therapy (>7 days) in children with CAP.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted across databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed. Studies comparing the efficacy and safety of short-course with long-course antibiotic regimens in children with CAP were eligible. We assessed the risk of bias using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Study characteristics such as publication year, country, setting, study design and antibiotic regimens were recorded. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for clinical outcomes, including clinical cure, treatment failure, total adverse events, serious adverse events, relapse and hospitalization. The primary outcomes were clinical cure and treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included total and serious adverse events, relapse and hospitalization rates.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies comprising 155,944 children met the inclusion criteria, with 15 of these studies being randomized controlled trials. There were no significant differences between short-course and long-course treatments in clinical cure [21,156 patients; RR, 1.01 (95% CI, 0.97-1.05); P = 0.73; I² = 81%], treatment failure [28,942 patients; RR,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 155,944 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free