ArticleAllergy2017
A new framework for the documentation and interpretation of oral food challenges in population-based and clinical research.
Article in Allergy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Emollient application from birth to prevent eczema in high-risk children: the BEEP RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Trial
- Reintroduction failure after negative food challenges in adults is common and mainly due to atypical symptoms.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Prevalence and Risk Factors of Food Allergy and Its Association With Asthma Coexistence and Severity in Bangladeshi Schoolchildren: A GIS-Based Cross-Sectional Study.Food science & nutrition · 2026Article
- Comparison of Double-Blind and Open Food Challenges for the Diagnosis of Food Allergy in Childhood: The ALDORADO Study.Allergy · 2025Article
- The future of food allergy diagnosis.Frontiers in allergy · 2024Review
- Developing a Prediction Model for Determination of Peanut Allergy Status in the Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) Studies.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2023Article
- Parental Knowledge about Allergies and Problems with an Elimination Diet in Children Aged 3 to 6 Years.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Real world use of peanut component testing among children in the Chicago metropolitan area.Allergy and asthma proceedings · 2022Article
- Low dietary adherence after a positive food challenge in food allergic adults.Clinical and translational allergy · 2022Article
- The dilemma of open or double-blind food challenges in diagnosing food allergy in children: Design of the ALDORADO trial.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2022Review
- Article
- Threshold of Reactivity and Tolerance to Precautionary Allergen-Labelled Biscuits of Baked Milk- and Egg-Allergic Children.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Prevalence and early-life risk factors of school-age allergic multimorbidity: The EuroPrevall-iFAAM birth cohort.Allergy · 2021Observational
- The Basophil Activation Test for Clinical Management of Food Allergies: Recent Advances and Future Directions.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2021Review
- Emerging Food Allergy Biomarkers.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2020Review
- Corrigendum.Allergy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrigendum.2020
Authors and funding
20 authors at 12 institutions in 10 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe conduct of oral food challenges as the preferred diagnostic standard for food allergy (FA) was harmonized over the last years. However, documentation and interpretation of challenge results, particularly in research settings, are not sufficiently standardized to allow valid comparisons between studies. Our aim was to develop a diagnostic toolbox to capture and report clinical observations in double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC).
methodsA group of experienced allergists, paediatricians, dieticians, epidemiologists and data managers developed generic case report forms and standard operating procedures for DBPCFCs and piloted them in three clinical centres. The follow-up of the EuroPrevall/iFAAM birth cohort and other iFAAM work packages applied these methods. RECOMMENDATIONS: A set of newly developed questionnaire or interview items capture the history of FA. Together with sensitization status, this forms the basis for the decision to perform a DBPCFC, following a standardized decision algorithm. A generic form including details about severity and timing captures signs and symptoms observed during or after the procedures. In contrast to the commonly used dichotomous outcome FA vs no FA, the allergy status is interpreted in multiple categories to reflect the complexity of clinical decision-making.
conclusionThe proposed toolbox sets a standard for improved documentation and harmonized interpretation of DBPCFCs. By a detailed documentation and common terminology for communicating outcomes, these tools hope to reduce the influence of subjective judgment of supervising physicians. All forms are publicly available for further evolution and free use in clinical and research settings.
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.