ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2011
Anaphylaxis in Latin America: a report of the online Latin American survey on anaphylaxis (OLASA).
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced maternal age and childhood allergy: marker or mechanism?Frontiers in allergy · 2026Article
- Editorial: Impact of dietary nanoparticles on food allergy development and immune response.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Latin American anaphylaxis registry.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023Article
- Knowledge of healthcare providers in the management of anaphylaxis.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2021Article
- Pharmacogenomics of Hypersensitivity to Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Review
- Functional Profile of Antigen Specific CD4Toxins · 2020Article
- Challenges of managing food allergy in the developing world.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2019Review
- Drug-induced anaphylaxis in China: a 10 year retrospective analysis of the Beijing Pharmacovigilance Database.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
- Anaphylaxis in an emergency care setting: a one year prospective study in children and adults.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2017Article
- Why a registry of Chronic Urticaria (CUR) is needed.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2017Article
- Who has anaphylaxis in Brazil? Validation of a questionnaire for population studies.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2017Article
- Particularities of allergy in the Tropics.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2016Review
- Cutaneous and systemic mastocytosis in children: a risk factor for anaphylaxis?Current allergy and asthma reports · 2015Review
- International consensus on (ICON) anaphylaxis.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2014Article
- Epidemiology of self-reported drug-induced immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions in the surgical population: a 5-year single-center survey in a romanian allergo-anaesthesia center.Clujul medical (1957) · 2013Article
- Pediatrics in Clinics: highlights.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aims of the Online Latin American Survey of Anaphylaxis (OLASA) were to identify the main clinical manifestations, triggers, and treatments of severe allergic reactions in patients who were seen by allergists from July 2008 to June 2010 in 15 Latin American countries and Portugal (n =634).
resultsOf all patients, 68.5% were older than 18 years, 41.6% were male, and 65.4% experienced the allergic reaction at home. The etiologic agent was identified in 87.4% of cases and predominantly consisted of drugs (31.2%), foods (23.3%), and insect stings (14.9%). The main symptom categories observed during the acute episodes were cutaneous (94.0%) and respiratory (79.0%). The majority of patients (71.6%) were treated initially by a physician (office/emergency room) within the first hour after the reaction occurred (60.2%), and 43.5% recovered in the first hour after treatment. Most patients were treated in an emergency setting, but only 37.3% received parenteral epinephrine alone or associated with other medication. However, 80.5% and 70.2% were treated with corticosteroids or antihistamines (alone or in association), respectively. A total of 12.9% of the patients underwent reanimation maneuvers, and 15.2% were hospitalized. Only 5.8% of the patients returned to the emergency room after discharge, with 21.7% returning in the first 6 hours after initial treatment.
conclusionThe main clinical manifestations of severe allergic reactions were cutaneous. The etiologic agents that were identified as causing these acute episodes differed according to age group. Following in order: drugs (31.2%), foods (23.3% and insect stings (14.9%) in adults with foods predominance in children. Treatment provided for acute anaphylactic reactions was not appropriate. It is necessary to improve educational programs in order to enhance the knowledge on this potentially fatal emergency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.