Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31072328›Full record

ReviewBMC veterinary research2019

Critically appraised topic on adverse food reactions of companion animals (7): signalment and cutaneous manifestations of dogs and cats with adverse food reactions.

Thierry Olivry, Ralf S Mueller

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC veterinary research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Black Soldier Fly (Veterinary sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Enterocytes in Food Hypersensitivity Reactions.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review of critically appraised topics on adverse food reactions of companion animals.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Thierry OlivryDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, 1060 William Moore Drive, Raleigh, NC, 27607, USA. tolivry@ncsu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1399-0034
Ralf S MuellerMedizinische Kleintierklinik, Centre for Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Ludwig Maximilian University, Veterinärstrasse 13, 80539, Munich, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5835-5910
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DENorth Carolina State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOutside of pruritus, there is no clear consensus on the nature and prevalence of cutaneous manifestations of adverse food reactions (AFRs) in dogs and cats.

resultsWe searched two databases on August 7, 2018, for articles reporting detailed data on the signalment and clinical signs of at least one dog or cat with a cutaneous AFR (CAFR). We identified 233 and 407 citations from which were selected 32 articles reporting original information. Twenty-two articles included data on 825 dogs with CAFRs. The reported age of onset varied from less than one to 13 years of age; a beginning of signs by 6 or 12 months of age was noted in 22 to 38% of dogs, respectively. The female-to-male ratio also varied considerably. Four breeds (German shepherd dogs, West Highland white terriers, Labrador and golden retrievers) accounted for about 40% of affected dogs. Most dogs diagnosed with a CAFR were pruritic, most often in a generalized pattern, with the ears, feet, and abdomen also being frequently affected; the perineum was uncommonly targeted, however. Canine CAFRs presented mainly as recurrent bacterial skin infections, otitis externa and atopic dermatitis. Twelve articles reported novel information on 210 cats with this syndrome. There was no apparent breed and gender predisposition for feline CAFRs, but cats appeared to develop signs later than dogs with the same syndrome. Most cats with a CAFR were pruritic, especially on the head/face and neck, with the abdomen and ears also commonly involved. Symmetric self-induced alopecia, a head-and-neck self-traumatic dermatitis, miliary dermatitis and variants of eosinophilic diseases were the most common manifestations of feline CAFRs.

conclusionsCAFRs affect dogs and cats of any age, any breed, and both genders, with the proportion of juvenile dogs diagnosed about twice that of cats. There are no reliable breed predisposition data. Most patients are pruritic, with half the dogs having generalized pruritus and half the cats scratching their face/head or neck. Canine CAFRs most often manifest as bacterial skin infections, otitis externa or atopic dermatitis; cats with CAFRs will exhibit the expected clinical phenotypes associated with feline hypersensitivity dermatitides.

Indexed as

AnimalsCatsDogsFood HypersensitivitySkin DiseasesAllergyCanineCatClinical signsDermatologyDietDogFelineFood allergySkin

Identifiers

PMID31072328
PMCPMC6507158
OpenAlexW2946874890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.