Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25005113›Full record

ArticleDer Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete2014

[Specific immunotherapy].

S A Grundmann, P Mosters, R Brehler

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete, 2014. 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.

S A GrundmannKlinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Von-Esmarch-Str. 58, 48149, Münster, Deutschland, sonja.grundmann@ukmuenster.de.
P Mosters
R Brehler

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

SCIT (subcutaneous immunotherapy) and SLIT (sublingual immunotherapy) are the only routinely available therapies, which modify allergic diseases sustainably. The ongoing reduction of symptoms and the lower need of symptomatic medication are able to improve the quality of life over a long period of time. However, allergic patients are underprovided due to low use of SIT (specific immunotherapy). After thorough diagnostic workup, the indication has to be checked carefully especially in patients with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma, to insure that SIT is standard therapy. Allergen extracts are manufacturer-specific preparations, therefore their effects cannot be compared directly, just as SCIT and SLIT efficacy cannot be compared directly. In general, preparations with proven efficacy and safety profile should be preferred. Allergens listed in the TAV (Therapeutic Allergen Regulation) fulfill these requirements. However, it is important to ensure adherence for 3 years of therapy, independent of the route of application. SIT has proven socioeconomic benefit already after a short time of therapy.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdministration, TopicalAllergensAsthmaHumansRhinitis, AllergicSublingual ImmunotherapyTreatment OutcomeAllergens

Identifiers

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.