Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract only checked I-ABX-05 standard review
Infant antibiotics and overweight (meta-analysis 2018)
Antibiotic exposure in early life and childhood overweight and obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Overview
Rasmussen SH et al.. Diabetes Obes Metab 2018 · PMID 29359849 · DOI 10.1111/dom.13230
Slightly higher risk, mainly with repeated or very early treatment.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Pool studies.
- How was the study done?
Meta-analysis.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
13 studies.
- What was actually found?
Small association.
- How large was the observed effect?
OR 1.11.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Small.
- What are the study's limitations?
Observational.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports association.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Mechanism.
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Rasmussen SH et al.
- Journal
- Diabetes Obes Metab
- Year
- 2018
- Identifier
- PMID 29359849 DOI 10.1111/dom.13230
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
not stated in abstract/record
2. Research question
Antibiotics in infancy and childhood overweight
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Meta-analysis – Systematic review and meta-analysis
- Population
527,504 children
- Country
Multinational
- Period
published 2018
- Sample size
13 studies (8 pooled)
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Observational
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Infant antibiotics
- Comparator
Unexposed
- Endpoints
Overweight/obesity
- Statistical methods
Pooled OR
5. Actual results
- Results
OR 1.11 (1.02-1.20); >1 treatment OR 1.24 (1.09-1.43); first 6 months OR 1.20 (1.04-1.37).
- Absolute risks
not reported
- Authors' conclusion
Slightly increased risk; unclear whether mediated via microbiota.
6. Strengths
- Large
7. Weaknesses
- Observational
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- AMSTAR 2
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- some concerns
- Rationale
Overlaps with I-ABX-04 primary studies.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
10. Relevance to the specific claim
11. Independent contrary findings
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
Moderate.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Shares primary studies with I-ABX-04; not independent confirmation.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | some concerns |
| Precision of results | moderate |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | moderate |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |