Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42671586›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of pediatrics2026

Honey vs. pharmacological treatment for acute cough in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Mariana Timm Brun, Maria Clara Abreu Vianna Braga, Sabrine Teixeira Ferraz Grunewald

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mariana Timm BrunMedical College, Sector of Health Sciences, Federal University of Paraná, 280 Padre Camargo St, Alto da Glória, Curitiba, Paraná, 80060-240, Brazil. marianabrun@ufpr.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-9704-1250
Maria Clara Abreu Vianna BragaMedical College, Salvador University, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-9886-3198
Sabrine Teixeira Ferraz GrunewaldMaternal and Child Department, Federal University of Juíz de Fora, Juíz de Fora, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1288-1338

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to compare honey with pharmacological treatment in pediatric patients with acute cough. Studies were searched across 5 databases. Analyzed outcomes were cough frequency, severity, and bothersomeness, alongside its impact on the sleep of both children and caregivers. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager Web tool. A post-hoc subgroup and leave-one-out sensitivity analysis were conducted to evaluate the influence of individual studies and medication class on heterogeneity. 7 studies were included in the systematic review and 6 in the meta-analysis, totaling 576 patients. Among them, 305 (53%) received honey. Participants' mean age ranged from 3 to 5 years, and follow-up duration was limited to 3 days. The primary analysis showed high heterogeneity and no statistically significant differences across most endpoints, except for cough effect on child's sleep, which was significantly reduced in the honey group (MD: -0.73; 95% CI: -1.45 to -0.01; p = 0.05). After sensitivity analysis, honey significantly improved all outcomes, including cough frequency, severity, bothersomeness, sleep quality of children and caregivers, and global score. Subgroup analyses confirmed consistent results regardless of the pharmacological comparator used. Alone, the honey-vs-dextromethorphan group showed significant benefit in two endpoints.

conclusionWhile the primary analysis demonstrated comparable efficacy between interventions across most endpoints, except for child sleep quality, exploratory post-hoc sensitivity analyses revealed a potential signal of honey superiority across all outcomes. Although these findings should be regarded as hypothesis-generating rather than definitive, the potential clinical benefit, combined with the established risks of pediatric antitussives, supports honey as a promising, low-risk alternative.

trial registrationCRD420261356244. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Pediatric acute cough commonly leads to inappropriate antitussive medication prescribing. • Honey outperforms placebo or no treatment for cough symptoms relief ≥ 10 or comorbidities. WHAT IS NEW: • Post-hoc sensitivity analysis suggests that honey is more effective than pharmacological therapy across all symptom domains. • Honey should be actively promoted over antitussives medications in children, given its safety and low cost.

Indexed as

Antitussive AgentsCoughHoneyAcute DiseaseChildChild, PreschoolHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAntitussive AgentsAcute coughHoneyMeta-analysisPediatricsPharmacologicSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42671586
PMCPMC13529870

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.