ReviewCurrent opinion in pediatrics2016
Anaphylaxis in children.
Review in Current opinion in pediatrics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Infant Anaphylaxis: A Diagnostic Challenge.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2021Review
- [Paediatric Life Support].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021Review
- Peanut (The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2021Article
- Characteristics and Treatment of Anaphylaxis in Children Visiting a Pediatric Emergency Department in Korea.BioMed research international · 2020Article
- Use of epinephrine in emergency department depends on anaphylaxis severity in children.European journal of pediatrics · 2019Article
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
Abstract
purpose of reviewAnaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that can be life threatening. We will review the most recent evidence regarding the diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, and prevention of anaphylaxis in children. RECENT
findingsHistamine and tryptase are not sufficiently accurate for the routine diagnosis of anaphylaxis, so providers should continue to rely on clinical signs. Platelet-activating factor shows some promise in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis. Intramuscular is the best route for epinephrine administration for children of all weights. Glucocorticoids may reduce prolonged hospitalizations for anaphylaxis. Children with anaphylaxis who have resolving symptoms and no history of asthma or previous biphasic reactions may be observed for as few as 3-4 h before emergency department discharge. Early peanut introduction reduces the risk of peanut allergy. SUMMARY: Epinephrine remains the mainstay of anaphylaxis treatment, and adjuvant medications should not be used in its place. All patients with anaphylaxis should be prescribed and trained to use an epinephrine autoinjector. Clinically important biphasic reactions are rare. Observation in the emergency department for most anaphylaxis patients is recommended, with the duration determined by risk factors. Admission is reserved for patients with unimproved or worsening symptoms, or prior biphasic reaction.
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.