ArticlePulmonary medicine2020
Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components.
Article in Pulmonary medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Allergy to Cats: Current Perspectives and Therapeutic Options.Clinical and translational allergy · 2026Review
- Diagnostic and therapeutic evaluation ofImmunotherapy · 2025Article
- Role of specific immunoglobulin-E in chronic rhinosinusitis: Its clinical relevance according to nasal challenge test.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2024Article
- Airborne indoor allergen serine proteases and their contribution to sensitisation and activation of innate immunity in allergic airway disease.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Review
- Selection of allergen extract for immunotherapy in polysensitized allergic rhinitis patients.Immunotherapy · 2024Article
- Animal exposure, sensitization, and allergic symptoms in first-year veterinary medicine students.Allergologie select · 2024Article
- [Research progress and clinical application of allergen nasal provocation test].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2023Review
- Study of Cat Allergy Using Controlled Methodology-A Review of the Literature and a Call to Action.Frontiers in allergy · 2022Review
- Allergen exposure chambers: implementation in clinical trials in allergen immunotherapy.Clinical and translational allergy · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIgE sensitization (atopy) to pets is commonly evaluated using pet dander extracts. However, the diagnosis by components seems to be more adequate to evaluate the clinical relevance (allergy) of sIgE sensitization.
objectiveTo study the association between IgE sensitization to pet allergen components and clinical symptoms.
resultsDog (34.6% vs. 23.5%) and cat dander (26.7% vs. 8.8%,
conclusionsSensitization to pet dander extract identifies atopic patients, but its utility to predict clinical relevance is poor. Allergenic components could help to define the clinical relevance of sensitization to furry animals and could reduce the need for provocation test.
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.