ReviewClinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology2015
Management of urticaria: not too complicated, not too simple.
Review in Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and quality of life improvement after bilastine treatment among patients with autoimmune chronic spontaneous urticaria.PloS one · 2025Article
- Peripheral blood T-cell modulation by omalizumab in chronic urticaria patients.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- [Anti-IgE-directed treatment of urticaria in a dermatological practice].Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Article
- Clinical review: The suggested management pathway for urticaria in primary care.Clinical and translational allergy · 2022Review
- Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the once-daily Urticaria Activity Score (UAS) in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria managed in clinical practice (the EVALUAS study).Health and quality of life outcomes · 2019Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In spite of being an old disease and apparently easy to diagnose, chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is still perceived as an uncontrollable and difficult to manage disease. The perception of the patient is that his/her condition is not well understood and that is suffering from a disorder with hidden causes that doctors are not able to tackle. Sometimes patients go through a number of clinicians until they found some CSU expert who is familiar with the disease. It is surprising that myths and believes with no scientific support still persist. Guidelines are not widely implemented, and recent tools to assess severity are infrequently used. European and American recent guidelines do not agree in several key points related to diagnosis and treatment, which further contributes to confusion. With the aim to clarify some aspects of the CSU picture, a group of allergists and dermatologists from the Spanish Dermatology and Allergy societies developed a Frequent Asked Questions leaflet that could facilitate physicians work in daily practice and contribute to a better knowledge of common clinical scenarios related to patients with CSU.
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.