ArticleAsia Pacific allergy2015
Attitudes, practices on allergic rhinitis of generalists and specialists in Philippine National Capital Region.
Article in Asia Pacific allergy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-world patient's practices in the management of allergic rhinitis in the Philippine setting.Asia Pacific allergy · 2026Article
- Allergic rhinitis and urticaria burden and antihistamine treatment options in Thailand: A modified Delphi study.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2025Article
- Real-world physician practices on the diagnosis and management of allergic rhinitis in the Philippine setting.Asia Pacific allergy · 2023Article
- Global expert views on the diagnosis, classification and pharmacotherapy of allergic rhinitis in clinical practice using a modified Delphi panel technique.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023Article
- Allergic rhinitis guidelines knowledge, attitudes, and practices among primary health care physicians: A national multicentre cross-sectional study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2023Article
- ARIA Care Pathways 2019: Next-Generation Allergic Rhinitis Care and Allergen Immunotherapy in Malaysia.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- A nationwide survey of otolaryngologists' compliance with Chinese guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of allergic rhinitis.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2021Article
- Closing the knowledge gap in Malaysian pharmacists: a virtual Allergic Rhinitis Boot Camp initiative.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2021Article
- Primary care management of allergic rhinitis: a cross-sectional study in four ASEAN countries.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2020Article
- Attitudes, practices on allergic rhinitis of three socioeconomic classes of Filipinos in the National Capital Region.Asia Pacific allergy · 2016Article
- Great learning, much networking, and friendship.Asia Pacific allergy · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) consistent with consensus guidelines is reported to result in better patient outcomes. However, physicians may manage patients independently of guidelines. Asian data on physician perspectives regarding AR diagnosis and management is limited.
objectiveThe study objective is to assess attitudes and practices on AR of Filipino specialists and generalists.
methodsA cross sectional survey of 100 specialists and 100 generalists was conducted from November 2014 to January 2015. A previously validated and pilot tested questionnaire was administered via structured face to face interviews.
resultsSpecialists reported greater adequate knowledge of AR (specialists, 58%; generalists, 39%) and adherence to guidelines (specialists, 84%; generalists, 54%). Diagnostic tests were not routinely used (specialists, 81%; generalists, 92%). Monotherapy, specifically antihistamines, was preferred for mild AR. For moderate-severe AR, preference for monotherapy versus combination therapy (specialists, 49% vs. 51%; generalists, 44% vs. 56%) was similar. Both groups preferred intranasal corticosteroid spray (INCS) for monotherapy and antileukotrienes, antihistamines, INCS for combination therapy. For adjuvant therapy, specialists (82%) preferred nasal irrigation/douche. Primary consideration for choice of therapy was efficacy. Cost was the perceived reason for patients' noncompliance with treatment.
conclusionDespite differences in awareness of and adherence to guidelines, prescribing patterns on management of mild and moderate-severe AR are similar among Filipino specialists and generalists. This can be attributed to a shared perception of efficacy and cost as drivers for therapeutic choices.
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.