ArticlePloS one2019
Identification of children with anaphylaxis at low risk of receiving acute inpatient therapies.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04755881 (SHARED), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
SHARED (Saguenay Hospitals Anaphylaxis Rule for Early Discharge) - Phase 2 : a Prospective Theoretical Validation
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of multiple epinephrine doses in anaphylaxis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2021Pooled it
- Trends and Variation in Pediatric Anaphylaxis Care From 2016 to 2022.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2023Article
- Clinical Features and Preventability of Delayed Diagnosis of Pediatric Appendicitis.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Article
- Reducing Admission for Anaphylaxis in a Pediatric Emergency Department Using a Clinical Decision Support Tool.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveOpportunity exists to reduce unnecessary hospitalizations for children with anaphylaxis given wide variation in admission rates across U.S. emergency departments (EDs). We sought to identify children hospitalized with anaphylaxis at low risk of receiving epinephrine and other acute inpatient therapies, as these patients may be candidates for ED discharge rather than inpatient hospitalization.
methodsWe conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of children 1-21 years of age hospitalized with anaphylaxis from 2009 to 2016. Acute inpatient therapies included intramuscular (IM) or racemic epinephrine, bronchodilators, fluid boluses, vasopressors, non-invasive ventilation, or intubation. We derived age-specific (pre-verbal [<36 months] vs. verbal [≥ 36 months]) prediction rules using recursive partitioning to identify children at low risk of receiving acute inpatient therapies.
resultsDuring the study period 665 children were hospitalized for anaphylaxis, of whom 108 (16.2%) received acute inpatient therapies. The prediction rule for patients < 36 months (no wheezing, no cardiac involvement [hypotension or wide pulse pressure]) had a sensitivity of 90.5% (CI 69.6-98.8%) and a negative predictive value of 98.3% (CI 94.1-99.8%) for identifying children at low risk of receipt of acute inpatient therapies during hospitalization. For children ≥ 36 months, the prediction rule (no wheezing, no cardiac involvement, presence of gastrointestinal symptoms) had a sensitivity of 90.8% (CI 82.7-96.0%) and a negative predictive value of 92.4% (CI 85.6-96.7%).
conclusionsWe derived age specific prediction rules for children hospitalized with anaphylaxis at low risk of receiving epinephrine and other acute inpatient therapies. These children may be candidates for ED discharge rather than inpatient hospitalization.
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.