ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2018
"Doctor, I have a Sulfa Allergy": Clarifying the Myths of Cross-Reactivity.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2018. 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prescribing carbonic anhydrase inhibitors to patients with "sulfa" antibiotics allergy: do we dare?Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- Special Considerations in the Treatment of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024Review
- Sulfonamides in ophthalmology: adverse reactions : Evidence-based use of sulfa drugs in ophthalmology.International ophthalmology · 2024Review
- Perioperative anaphylactic reactions to central venous and pulmonary artery catheters containing chlorhexidine, sulfadiazine, or latex: a historical cohort study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2023Article
- Sulfonamide drugs: structure, antibacterial property, toxicity, and biophysical interactions.Biophysical reviews · 2021Review
- Sulfonamide Allergies.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Our purpose is to present an evidence-based approach, directed primarily towards eye-care specialists, clarifying whether certain drugs should or should not be used in patients with sulfonamide allergy. We conducted a literature search using PubMed to identify the risk of ophthalmic-specific drugs in patients with a self-reported sulfonamide allergy. MeSH key words included "sulfonamide" and "hypersensitivity". Articles specifically geared towards ophthalmic diseases were sought. The evidence illustrates that individuals with sulfonamide allergy are intrinsically predisposed to higher rates of allergic reaction that is not specific towards sulfonamide non-antimicrobials or sulfur-based medications. We provide a simplified algorithm using the 2017 Clinical Guide to Ophthalmic Drugs to help busy eye care clinicians determine whether a certain common ophthalmic medication is safe or unsafe to prescribe in a patient with a "sulfa allergy".
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.