Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10937462›Full record

ReviewPaediatric drugs

Recognising antibacterial hypersensitivity in children.

A Romano

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Paediatric drugs. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 87% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Case Study 10: A Case to Investigate Acetyl Transferase Kinetics.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

A RomanoDepartment of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, UCSC, CI Columbus, Rome, Italy. columbus.allerg@linet.it
Columbus Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adverse reactions to antibacterial agents are not uncommon in children. They are classified as 'immediate' or 'nonimmediate' according to the time interval between drug administration and onset. Immediate reactions occur within 1 hour and are manifested by urticaria and/or angioedema, bronchospasm and anaphylactic shock; immunological reactions are mediated by IgE antibodies. The main nonimmediate reactions (occuring after more than 1 hour) are maculopapular rash, urticaria and serum sickness; T lymphocytes may participate in maculopapular rash. Clinical assessment of such reactions is complex. The patient's history is fundamental; the allergological examination includes in vivo and in vitro tests selected on the basis of the clinical features and the phase of reaction. In the late phase, prick and intradermal tests are sensitive in evaluating beta-lactam allergy. Together with delayed-reading intradermal testing, patch testing seems to be useful in diagnosing maculopapular reactions to systemically administered aminopenicillins. Determination of specific IgE levels is the most common in vitro method for diagnosing immediate reactions. In the acute phase, serum tryptase and urinary N-methylhistamine assays are reliable in diagnosing type I pathogenic mechanisms in immediate reactions. Unfortunately, there are few in vitro tests for evaluating other reactions, and most are not fully validated. In selected cases, provocation tests should be performed.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective AgentsChildDrug HypersensitivityHumansAnti-Infective Agents

Identifiers

PMID10937462
OpenAlexW2056769427

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.