Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy of Corticosteroids in Community-acquired Pneumonia: A Randomized Double-Blinded Clinical Trial

Snijders, Dominic, Daniels, Johannes M. A., de Graaff, Casper S., van der Werf, Tjip S., Boersma, Wim G.·2010·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
DOI 10.1164/rccm.200905-0808oc
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

RATIONALE: Some studies have shown a beneficial effect of corticosteroids in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), possibly by diminishing local and systemic antiinflammatory host response. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of adjunctive prednisolone treatment in patients hospitalized with CAP. METHODS: Hospitalized patients, clinically and radiologically diagnosed with CAP using standard clinical and radiological criteria, were randomized to receive 40 mg prednisolone for 7 days or placebo, along with antibiotics. Primary outcome was clinical cure at Day 7. Secondary outcomes were clinical cure at Day 30, length of stay, time to clinical stability, defervescence, and C-reactive protein. Disease severity was scored using CURB-65 (a severity index for community-acquired pneumonia evaluating Confusion, blood Urea nitrogen, Respiratory rate, Blood pressure, and age 65 or older) and Pneumonia Severity Index. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We enrolled 213 patients. Fifty-four (25.4%) patients had a CURB-65 score greater than 2, and 93 (43.7%) patients were in Pneumonia Severity Index class IV-V. Clinical cure at Days 7 and 30 was 84/104 (80.8%) and 69/104 (66.3%) in the prednisolone group and 93/109 (85.3%) and 84/109 (77.1%) in the placebo group (P = 0.38 and P = 0.08). Patients on prednisolone had faster defervescence and faster decline in serum C-reactive protein levels compared with placebo. Subanalysis of patients with severe pneumonia did not show differences in clinical outcome. Late failure (>72 h after admittance) was more common in the prednisolone group (20 patients, 19.2%) than in the placebo group (10 patients, 6.4%; P = 0.04). Adverse events were few and not different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prednisolone (at 40 mg) once daily for a week does not improve outcome in hospitalized patients with CAP. A benefit in more severely ill patients cannot be excluded. Because of its association with increased late failure and lack of efficacy prednisolone should not be recommended as routine adjunctive treatment in CAP.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1164/rccm.200905-0808oc

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Cited by

See all 295

Metadata

Authors
Snijders, D., Daniels, J. M. A., de Graaff, C. S., van der Werf, T. S., & Boersma, W. G.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2010-05-01
Volume
181
Issue
9
Pages
975-982
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
DOI
10.1164/rccm.200905-0808oc
OpenAlex
W2097682523
Cited by
295
References
24
FWCI
19.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Efficacy of Corticosteroids in Community-acquired Pneumonia: A Randomized Double-Blinded Clinical Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.200905-0808oc
The paper
Snijders, D., Daniels, J. M. A., de Graaff, C. S., van der Werf, T. S., & Boersma, W. G. (2010). Efficacy of Corticosteroids in Community-acquired Pneumonia: A Randomized Double-Blinded Clinical Trial. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200905-0808oc

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.