Introduction

Antibiotics remain essential pediatric therapies, and stewardship should not impede timely treatment of children who require antimicrobial therapy. [1] Antibiotic stewardship aims to improve the quality of antibiotic decisions: whether treatment is necessary, which agent is most appropriate, how treatment should be administered, when it should be reassessed, and when it should stop. [1]

These distinctions matter especially in pediatrics. Common infections, drug-related considerations, first-line treatment strategies, and evidence supporting treatment duration differ between children and adults. [1] Adult stewardship evidence therefore cannot automatically be extrapolated to pediatric populations.

The global resistance problem remains substantial. In July 2026, WHO reported that approximately 1 in 6 laboratory-confirmed bacterial infections causing common infections worldwide in 2023 were resistant to antibiotics. They also reported that resistance increased between 2018 and 2023 in more than 40% of monitored pathogen-antibiotic combinations. [2] These are global, not pediatric-specific, estimates and should not be interpreted as the prevalence of resistance among U.S. children.

Stewardship also has an immediate patient-level rationale. In a retrospective cohort involving 2,804,245 commercially insured children treated for common outpatient infections, inappropriate antibiotic prescribing was associated with increased risks of several adverse drug events and increased attributable healthcare expenditures. [12] Because the study was observational, these findings establish association rather than randomized evidence of causation.

Why Pediatric Antibiotic Stewardship Matters

Pediatric stewardship must protect two clinical priorities simultaneously: avoiding unnecessary antimicrobial exposure and preserving effective treatment when bacterial infection warrants antibiotics. [1]

The American Academy of Pediatrics and Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society frame stewardship around appropriate indication, antimicrobial agent, dose, duration, and route. [1] The relevant clinical question is therefore not simply whether antibiotic use can be reduced. It is whether an individual child has an infection for which antibiotics provide benefit and, if so, which regimen best matches that infection and patient.

CDC’s updated 2026 outpatient framework similarly describes stewardship as a structured effort to improve antibiotic prescribing. The revised Core Elements emphasize leadership commitment, accountability, stewardship expertise, active interventions, tracking, reporting, and education. [13]

For hospitals, CDC continues to emphasize organizational leadership, accountable stewardship leadership, pharmacy expertise, active interventions such as prospective audit and feedback or preauthorization, tracking, reporting, and education. [14]

Stewardship is therefore an organized quality-of-care strategy, not an isolated effort to reduce prescription counts.

Diagnostic Stewardship Comes First

Antibiotic stewardship begins with diagnostic accuracy. The decision to prescribe depends on identifying a clinical presentation for which antibacterial therapy is likely to provide benefit.

CDC pediatric outpatient guidance illustrates this principle across several common childhood infections. [3]

Acute Bacterial Sinusitis

CDC identifies bacterial presentations through clinical patterns that include:

• Persistent nasal discharge or daytime cough for more than 10 days without improvement
• Worsening or new symptoms after initial improvement
• Severe symptoms including fever of at least 39°C with purulent nasal discharge for at least 3 consecutive days [3]

Children with persistent but nonsevere illness may be candidates for watchful waiting, whereas severe or worsening disease warrants antibiotic treatment. [3]

Acute Otitis Media

Acute otitis media should not be diagnosed without middle-ear effusion. [3] Diagnostic criteria incorporate tympanic-membrane bulging, new-onset otorrhea not attributable to otitis externa, or appropriate combinations of mild bulging with acute otalgia or intense tympanic-membrane erythema. [3]

Watchful waiting may be appropriate in selected children with mild disease. [3]

Viral Upper Respiratory Infection and Bronchiolitis

Management of the common cold and nonspecific viral upper respiratory infection should focus on symptomatic care rather than antibiotics. [3]

Antibiotics are also not helpful for uncomplicated bronchiolitis and should not be used routinely. [3]

Avoiding antibiotics in these settings is not therapeutic inaction. It prevents drug exposure when antibacterial benefit is not expected.

Group A Streptococcal Pharyngitis

Pharyngitis demonstrates the connection between diagnostic and antibiotic stewardship.

The 2025 Infectious Diseases Society of America guideline update conditionally suggests using a clinical scoring system to determine which children and adults with sore throat should undergo testing for group A Streptococcus. The certainty of evidence is very low. [4]

The principal value of scoring systems is identifying patients with a low probability of GAS in whom diagnostic testing is unlikely to be useful. [4] High-risk individuals may still warrant testing despite a low score, and the recommendation does not apply to children younger than 3 years. [4]

The stewardship implication extends beyond prescribing. Inappropriate diagnostic testing can create downstream pressure for unnecessary treatment, particularly when a positive result may represent colonization rather than the cause of symptoms.

Antibiotic Selection: Appropriate Spectrum Matters

Once antibiotic treatment is justified, stewardship should shift seamlessly to regimen optimization.

AAP/PIDS guidance supports using the narrowest-spectrum regimen that adequately treats the bacterial infection, along with appropriate dosing, route, and duration. [1]

This principle does not mean choosing a narrow agent when broader empiric coverage is justified by clinical circumstances such as:

• Severity of illness
• Infection site
• Patient-specific risk factors
• Local microbiology
• Previous resistant organisms
• Relevant recent antimicrobial exposure
• Other clinically meaningful epidemiologic information

Stewardship seeks the appropriate spectrum, not the narrowest possible spectrum regardless of circumstances.

Local susceptibility information matters when choosing empiric therapy because resistance patterns vary across institutions and communities. [1,3]

Treatment Duration: Shorter Is Not Universally Better

Recognition that many traditional antibiotic courses were unnecessarily long has been an important development in stewardship. [5,6]

An equally important principle is that “shorter is better” isn’t a universal rule. [7-9]

Treatment duration should be guided by evidence for the specific infection, population, severity, antimicrobial regimen, and clinical response.

Community-Acquired Pneumonia

The SCOUT-CAP randomized clinical trial enrolled otherwise healthy children aged 6-71 months with uncomplicated outpatient community-acquired pneumonia who had already demonstrated early clinical improvement. [5]

A 5-day strategy was compared with a 10-day strategy.

Clinical response and individual desirability-of-outcome components did not differ materially between strategies. When antibiotic duration was incorporated into the response-adjusted desirability analysis, the short-course strategy had a 69% probability of a more desirable overall outcome than the standard-course strategy. [5]

The result supports shorter treatment in the selected population studied. It does not establish a universal 5-day treatment rule for every child with pneumonia.

A 2026 systematic review and meta-analysis included seven randomized trials comprising 8,590 children with outpatient CAP. In younger children with clinically diagnosed nonsevere CAP, 3 days of amoxicillin was noninferior to longer 5-, 7-, or 10-day regimens for treatment success in the pooled analysis (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.96-1.02). [6]

Shorter treatment was also associated with fewer nonsevere adverse events in that analysis. [6]

The investigators emphasized important limitations in applicability across age groups, disease definitions, antimicrobial regimens, and clinical settings. [6]

The evidence therefore supports shorter treatment for selected uncomplicated outpatient CAP populations, not for every pediatric pneumonia presentation.

Urinary Tract Infection

Pediatric urinary tract infection provides an important counterexample to automatic shortening of therapy.

The SCOUT randomized clinical trial enrolled children aged 2 months to 10 years with symptomatic UTI who had demonstrated clinical improvement after the first 5 days of antimicrobial treatment. [7]

Children were randomized either to stop active therapy after 5 days or to receive another 5 days of active antimicrobial treatment.

Treatment failure occurred in:

• 2 of 328 children receiving standard-course treatment: 0.6%
• 14 of 336 children receiving short-course treatment: 4.2% [7]

The absolute difference was 3.6 percentage points, with an upper confidence bound of 5.5%. [7]

Because the upper confidence bound exceeded the trial’s prespecified 5% noninferiority margin, the study failed to demonstrate statistical noninferiority of short-course therapy. [7]

The investigators nevertheless noted that treatment failure remained uncommon in the short-course group and concluded that shorter therapy might be considered in selected children demonstrating clinical improvement after 5 days. [7] That interpretation should not be restated as equivalence between the two durations.

A subsequent systematic review and meta-analysis included 12 randomized trials involving 1,442 children. [8] For febrile UTI, pooled cure rates statistically favored treatment for at least 7 days, although heterogeneity was high. [8] For afebrile UTI, the analysis found no significant difference in cure between short- and standard-course therapy. [8]

These findings reinforce the need to distinguish febrile from afebrile UTI and to consider patient-specific risk rather than applying one treatment duration to every pediatric UTI.

Acute Otitis Media

The evidence for acute otitis media provides another reason to avoid indiscriminate course shortening.

A 2026 systematic review evaluated 12 randomized trials involving 3,409 children. [9]

No short-versus-long comparison met the review’s prespecified criteria for noninferiority for treatment success, and five studies reported statistically worse treatment results with shorter therapy. [9]

The evidence base had substantial limitations. Most studies were conducted before 2000, many had a high risk of bias, and antimicrobial regimens varied. [9]

The review therefore does not establish that every child with acute otitis media requires a long course. It does show that equivalent outcomes with shorter treatment cannot simply be assumed across pediatric AOM regimens. [9]

Taken together, CAP, UTI, and AOM illustrate a central stewardship principle:

Shorten treatment when reliable, syndrome-specific evidence supports it, not merely because fewer antibiotic days are assumed to be better. [5-9]

Reassess Therapy After Treatment Begins

The decision to initiate antibiotics should not become an irreversible treatment plan.

AAP/PIDS guidance identifies postprescription review with feedback as an important inpatient stewardship strategy. Review commonly occurs about 48-72 hours after antibiotics are initiated, when additional clinical, diagnostic, and microbiologic information becomes available. [1]

At reassessment, clinicians can reconsider:

• Whether the working diagnosis remains likely
• Whether bacterial infection is still supported
• Whether culture or molecular results identify a pathogen
• Whether empiric therapy can be narrowed
• Whether combination therapy remains necessary
• Whether intravenous therapy can be converted to oral therapy
• Whether antibiotics can be discontinued
• Whether treatment duration and the planned stop date remain appropriate [1]

This approach permits empiric therapy when clinically necessary while creating an explicit opportunity to modify treatment as diagnostic uncertainty decreases.

AAP/PIDS also notes that one potential disadvantage of antibiotic preauthorization is delayed antibiotic administration for sepsis. [1]

That distinction is central to safe stewardship. Programs should improve empiric treatment decisions without creating inappropriate barriers when prompt therapy is clinically necessary.

Audit, Feedback, and Prescriber-Level Data

Education is valuable, but education alone is usually insufficient to create a durable stewardship program.

In a cluster randomized trial of pediatric primary-care practices, Gerber and colleagues evaluated a 1-hour clinician education intervention combined with quarterly individualized prescribing feedback. [10]

Broad-spectrum off-guideline prescribing for targeted bacterial acute respiratory infections declined:

• From 26.8% to 14.3% in intervention practices
• From 28.4% to 22.6% in control practices [10]

The difference between prescribing trajectories was statistically significant. [10]

The trial was conducted within a defined regional network and focused primarily on prescribing behavior rather than major patient-centered outcomes. The magnitude of benefit should therefore not automatically be generalized to all outpatient environments.

More recent inpatient evidence points in the same operational direction.

In a 2025 quasi-experimental study of children hospitalized with CAP, appropriate antibiotic choice and duration increased from 213 of 413 encounters before clinician feedback reports, or 52%, to 308 of 387 encounters after implementation, or 80%. [11]

Interrupted time-series analysis estimated an immediate 18% increase in the proportion receiving appropriate antibiotic choice and duration (95% CI, 3%- 33%). [11]

An adjusted Poisson model found the intervention was associated with a 32% higher rate of appropriate antibiotic choice and duration (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.12-1.56). [11]

The study found no difference in length of stay or revisits after the intervention. [11]

Because the study was quasi-experimental, the intervention should be described as associated with improved adherence rather than as definitively causing the entire observed improvement.

The 2026 CDC Outpatient Stewardship Framework

CDC updated the Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship on August 3, 2026. [13]

The revision places greater emphasis on health-system participation while retaining applicability to independent outpatient facilities and individual clinicians. [13]

Core element	Practical implication
Leadership commitment	Dedicate human, financial, and information-technology resources. [13]
Accountability	Designate leaders responsible for stewardship development, management, and outcomes. [13]
Expertise	Combine antibiotic stewardship expertise with outpatient clinical expertise. [13]
Action	Implement interventions such as clinical decision support or audit and feedback. [13]
Tracking	Monitor prescribing, stewardship interventions, and relevant outcomes. [13]
Reporting	Regularly provide prescribing and outcome data to clinicians and leadership. [13]
Education	Educate clinicians, patients, and caregivers about optimal prescribing, adverse effects, and resistance. [13]

For pediatric systems, this framework complements the child-specific clinical considerations outlined by AAP/PIDS. [1,13]

Penicillin-Allergy Labels as a Stewardship Issue

A penicillin-allergy label can substantially influence antibiotic selection.

CDC reports that approximately 10% of U.S. patients report a penicillin allergy, whereas less than 1% are truly allergic when appropriately evaluated. [15]

An inaccurate allergy label can lead clinicians to use second-line or broader-spectrum antibiotics and has been associated with less optimal therapy, antimicrobial-resistance concerns, adverse events, and increased healthcare costs. [15]

Evaluation can include:

1. A detailed history of the original reaction
2. Validated risk stratification
3. Penicillin skin testing when appropriate
4. Direct oral challenge when appropriate [15]

Direct oral challenge is generally intended for appropriately selected low-risk patients and should be performed using a defined protocol in a supervised setting with rescue treatment available. [15]

Severe Delayed Hypersensitivity

Direct oral challenge and routine skin testing are not appropriate for patients with histories of severe delayed hypersensitivity reactions such as:

• Stevens-Johnson syndrome
• Toxic epidermal necrolysis
• Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms
• Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis
• Multifocal bullous fixed-drug eruption
• Drug-induced organ or blood-cell injury [15]

CDC recommends referral of high-risk patients and patients with severe delayed hypersensitivity histories to a drug-allergy specialist. [15]

Penicillin-allergy evaluation can therefore be an important stewardship intervention, but delabeling must remain a structured clinical process rather than an assumption that a reported allergy is incorrect.

Practical Pediatric Stewardship Framework

Decision point	Clinical question	Stewardship approach
Before testing	Will the test distinguish bacterial disease or change management?	Apply syndrome-specific diagnostic criteria and avoid low-value testing. [3,4]
Before prescribing	Is there evidence that antibiotics provide benefit?	Avoid antibiotics for uncomplicated viral URI and bronchiolitis. [3]
Initial therapy	What spectrum is appropriate for this infection and child?	Use evidence-based first-line therapy while incorporating local susceptibility and patient factors. [1,3]
Early reassessment	Does new information continue to support the initial regimen?	Reassess diagnosis, spectrum, route, microbiology, and the need for continued therapy. [1]
Duration	Has a shorter course been validated for this syndrome and population?	Use infection-specific evidence rather than a universal short-course rule. [5-9]
Allergy	Is a reported penicillin allergy adequately characterized?	Use structured history and validated risk assessment; test or challenge only when clinically appropriate. [15]
Program performance	Can clinicians see how prescribing compares with evidence-based practice?	Use audit, feedback, standardized pathways, tracking, and reporting. [10,11,13]

Measuring Stewardship Without Rewarding the Wrong Behavior

Antibiotic volume alone is an incomplete measure of prescribing quality.

AAP/PIDS identifies days of therapy normalized to patient-days as a useful inpatient utilization measure and describes diagnosis- and encounter-based measures as useful in outpatient stewardship. [1]

Relevant quality measures can include:

• Antibiotic days of therapy
• Broad-spectrum antibiotic use
• Guideline-concordant antibiotic selection
• Appropriate treatment duration
• Diagnosis-specific prescribing
• Acceptance of stewardship recommendations
• Antibiotic discontinuation after negative diagnostic results
• Relevant clinical or safety outcomes [1]

CDC’s 2026 outpatient Core Elements similarly emphasize measuring antibiotic prescribing, stewardship interventions, and relevant outcomes, then reporting those findings to clinicians and leadership. [13]

The goal is not simply a lower antibiotic-use number. A meaningful stewardship program should improve appropriateness while monitoring for unintended consequences.

Special Populations and Limits of Extrapolation

Children enrolled in stewardship trials are not interchangeable with all pediatric patients.

SCOUT-CAP involved otherwise healthy young children with uncomplicated outpatient CAP who had already shown early clinical improvement. [5]

The SCOUT UTI trial enrolled children who were clinically improving after the initial 5 days of treatment. [7]

These findings should not automatically determine treatment for:

• Neonates
• Immunocompromised children
• Critically ill children
• Children with invasive infection
• Children with major medical complexity
• Complicated pneumonia
• Significant anatomic abnormalities
• Poor source control
• Lack of expected clinical improvement

The February 2026 IDSA/PIDS CAP guideline further illustrates this distinction. Its current scope addresses pneumonia associated with parapneumonic effusion and empyema. [16]

That complicated-pneumonia population is clinically different from otherwise healthy children with uncomplicated outpatient pneumonia enrolled in short-course trials. [5,16]

The 2026 Guideline Landscape

Several major sources relevant to pediatric stewardship have recently changed or been reaffirmed.

AAP/PIDS Stewardship Policy

The AAP/PIDS Antibiotic Stewardship in Pediatrics policy statement was reaffirmed in September 2025 and remains active. [1]

CDC Outpatient Stewardship

CDC released the revised Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship on August 3, 2026. [13]

The new framework expands emphasis on health-system leadership while retaining clinic- and clinician-level stewardship strategies. [13]

Pediatric Community-Acquired Pneumonia

IDSA and PIDS published updated pediatric CAP recommendations on February 24, 2026. [16]

The current guideline specifically addresses pediatric pneumonia associated with parapneumonic effusion and empyema. [16]

It should not be characterized as a comprehensive new set of recommendations for every aspect of uncomplicated pediatric CAP.

Group A Streptococcal Pharyngitis

The October 2025 IDSA update addresses risk assessment and patient selection for GAS diagnostic testing. [4]

Its recommendation to use a clinical scoring system is conditional and based on very low-certainty evidence. [4]

The guideline process is modular. Individual recommendations should therefore be interpreted according to the sections currently released rather than assuming that every component of previous GAS management guidance has been replaced.

Safety Considerations

Antibiotic exposure can produce clinically important adverse effects, including allergic reactions, gastrointestinal effects, Clostridioides difficile infection, and other drug-related toxicity. [1,12]

Avoiding unnecessary therapy reduces exposure to these risks.

The opposite risk must remain equally visible. Delayed, inadequate, or prematurely discontinued treatment of genuine bacterial infection can also harm children.

Stewardship is therefore not synonymous with:

• Withholding antibiotics from patients likely to benefit
• Automatically choosing the narrowest agent
• Automatically converting every patient to oral therapy
• Automatically stopping treatment after a predetermined short duration
• Creating authorization barriers that delay clinically urgent treatment

Treatment-duration decisions illustrate this balance particularly well. CAP evidence supports shorter therapy in selected uncomplicated populations. [5,6] UTI evidence is more conditional, and a major pediatric randomized trial did not meet its noninferiority criterion for 5-day therapy. [7,8] Recent AOM evidence likewise does not support assuming equivalent outcomes from shorter courses. [9]

Clinical Implications

Stewardship begins with diagnosis

The decision not to prescribe an antibiotic is safest when supported by an accurate diagnosis rather than an arbitrary prescribing target. [3,4]

Regimen optimization is multidimensional

Indication, spectrum, dose, route, and duration all contribute to appropriate antimicrobial therapy. [1]

Short-course treatment must remain syndrome-specific

Evidence supporting shorter CAP therapy cannot automatically be transferred to UTI, AOM, invasive infections, or complicated pneumonia. [5-9,16]

Prescribing behavior is modifiable

Randomized outpatient evidence and contemporary inpatient evidence show that audit, feedback, and clinician-level prescribing data can improve adherence to stewardship recommendations. [10,11]

Allergy assessment belongs within stewardship

Proper evaluation of penicillin-allergy labels may allow appropriately selected patients to receive preferred beta-lactam therapy while preserving safeguards for genuine serious hypersensitivity. [15]

Stewardship should be embedded in systems of care

CDC’s 2026 framework explicitly recognizes leadership, accountability, expertise, measurement, reporting, and education as components of outpatient stewardship. [13]

Clinical judgment remains necessary

Guidelines and pathways can standardize common decisions, but severity, host factors, microbiology, anatomy, source control, and treatment response may require individualized management.

Limitations of the Evidence

The pediatric stewardship evidence base remains heterogeneous.

Some foundational implementation studies are more than a decade old, whereas important treatment-duration questions have only recently been evaluated in contemporary randomized trials and systematic reviews. [5-11]

Results from highly selected trial populations may not generalize to children with severe disease or substantial medical complexity. [5,7]

The 2026 CAP systematic review included trials with differences in age, clinical diagnosis, setting, and treatment regimen. [6]

The UTI meta-analysis demonstrated high heterogeneity in the febrile-UTI analysis and included a relatively small subgroup of children with urinary tract abnormalities. [8]

The 2026 AOM review included numerous older trials, most with high risk of bias, and evaluated different antimicrobial agents. [9]

Observational analyses of adverse drug events and quasi-experimental stewardship interventions remain susceptible to residual confounding. [11,12]

Treatment recommendations also continue to evolve. The 2026 CDC outpatient Core Elements are newly released, and the current IDSA/PIDS pediatric CAP guideline addresses a narrower scope of complicated pneumonia than the title alone might imply. [13,16]

Future Directions

Pediatric stewardship research should continue defining optimal treatment duration by taking into account pertinent factors such as type of infection, its severity, age of patient, causative pathogen, antimicrobial agent, and patient’s clinical response, etc. [1,6,8,9]

Additional research is needed to evaluate whether improvements in prescribing practices are associated with meaningful patient-centered outcomes, reduced antimicrobial resistance, preservation of the microbiome, improved long-term safety, reduced healthcare utilization, and sustained implementation of stewardship interventions over time.[1]

Future implementation studies should determine which combinations of clinical decision support, pharmacist involvement, prescriber feedback, peer comparison, diagnostic stewardship, health-system accountability, and caregiver communication produce sustainable improvements across diverse pediatric settings. [1,10,11,13]

References

1. Gerber JS, Jackson MA, Tamma PD, Zaoutis TE; Committee on Infectious Diseases, Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society. (2021). Antibiotic Stewardship in Pediatrics. Pediatrics, 147(1), e2020040295. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2020-040295. PMID: 33372120. Policy statement reaffirmed September 2025.
2. https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/147/1/
   e2020040295/33434/Antibiotic-Stewardship-in-Pediatrics
3. World Health Organization. (2026). Antimicrobial resistance. Fact sheet. July 16, 2026. Accessed August 7, 2026.
4. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/antimicrobial-resistance
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024). Outpatient Clinical Care for Pediatric Populations. Updated April 22, 2024. Accessed August 7, 2026.
6. https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/hcp/clinical-care/pediatric-outpatient.html
7. Infectious Diseases Society of America. (2025). Clinical Practice Guideline Update on Group A Streptococcal Pharyngitis: Risk Assessment Using Clinical Scoring Systems in Children and Adults. Section updated October 14, 2025. Accessed August 7, 2026.
8. https://www.idsociety.org/practice-guideline/streptococcal-pharyngitis2/
9. Williams DJ, Creech CB, Walter EB, et al. (2022). Short- vs Standard-Course Outpatient Antibiotic Therapy for Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Children: The SCOUT-CAP Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Pediatrics, 176(3), 253-261. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.5547. PMID: 35040920. PMCID: PMC8767493.
10. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35040920/
11. Benkendorff A, Puntscher S, Flatscher-Thöni M, et al. (2026). Shorter Versus Longer Antibiotic Treatment in Children With Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analyses. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 123(9), 240-247. DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.m2025.0238. PMID: 41572864. PMCID: PMC13340186.
12. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41572864/
13. Zaoutis T, Shaikh N, Fisher BT, et al. (2023). Short-Course Therapy for Urinary Tract Infections in Children: The SCOUT Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Pediatrics, 177(8), 782-789. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2023.1979. PMID: 37358858. PMCID: PMC10294016. Corrected April 15, 2024: JAMA Pediatrics, 178(6), 630. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2024.0973. PMID: 38619852.
14. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/
    2806198
15. Noronha AA, Domingues GR, de Souza GC, Nau AL, Lo DS. (2025). Short- versus standard-course antibiotic therapy for urinary tract infection in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pediatric Nephrology, 40(8), 2481-2488. DOI: 10.1007/s00467-024-06509-z. PMID: 39352481.
16. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39352481/
17. Benkendorff A, Puntscher S, Flatscher-Thöni M, et al. (2026). Shorter versus longer antibiotic therapy for children with acute otitis media: A systematic review. European Journal of Pediatrics, 185(3), Article 155. DOI: 10.1007/s00431-026-06788-8. PMID: 41764103. PMCID: PMC12950071.
18. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41764103/
19. Gerber JS, Prasad PA, Fiks AG, et al. (2013). Effect of an outpatient antimicrobial stewardship intervention on broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing by primary care pediatricians: a randomized trial. JAMA, 309(22), 2345-2352. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.6287. PMID: 23757082.
20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23757082/
21. Chiotos K, Dutcher L, Grundmeier RW, et al. (2025). Impact of Clinician Feedback Reports on Antibiotic Use in Children Hospitalized With Community-acquired Pneumonia. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 80(2), 263-270. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciae593. PMID: 39656188. PMCID: PMC12120840.
22. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39656188/
23. Butler AM, Brown DS, Durkin MJ, et al. (2022). Association of Inappropriate Outpatient Pediatric Antibiotic Prescriptions With Adverse Drug Events and Health Care Expenditures. JAMA Network Open, 5(5), e2214153. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.14153. PMID: 35616940. Figure 1 corrected June 17, 2022: JAMA Network Open, 5(6), e2221479. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.21479. PMID: 35713908.
24. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/
    2792723
25. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2026). Core Elements of Outpatient Antibiotic Stewardship. Updated August 3, 2026. Reviewed July 6, 2026. Accessed August 7, 2026.
26. https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/hcp/core-elements/outpatient-antibiotic-stewardship.html
27. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). Core Elements of Hospital Antibiotic Stewardship Programs. Updated September 15, 2025. Accessed August 7, 2026.
28. https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/hcp/core-elements/hospital.html
29. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). Clinical Features of Penicillin Allergy. Updated August 25, 2025. Accessed August 7, 2026.
30. https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/hcp/clinical-signs/index.html
31. Infectious Diseases Society of America; Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society. (2026). IDSA/PIDS 2026 Guidelines for the Management of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Infants and Children Older Than 3 Months of Age. Published and last updated February 24, 2026. Accessed August 7, 2026.
32. https://www.idsociety.org/practice-guideline/community-acquired-pneumonia-in-infants-and-children/