ArticleCureus2022
Role of Allergist Advice in Determining Personal Decisions for COVID-19 Vaccination of People With a History of Allergies.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- COVID-19 vaccine provocation test outcome in high-risk allergic patients: A retrospective study from a tertiary hospital in Indonesia.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Vaccination is the most important confirmed tool that can stop the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but the vaccination rate remains low in some countries, including Romania, despite consistent and undoubtedly scientific proof of this disease-prevention method. The risk of allergic reactions after COVID-19 vaccines may be a reasonable cause for the antivaccination attitude of people with a history of allergies or who consider themselves at risk for having severe allergic reactions after vaccination. Objective Our paper aims to analyze the role of allergist advice in getting people with a history of allergies to trust and accept COVID-19 vaccines and to evaluate the real risk of allergic reactions to these vaccines in this population. Method We performed a retrospective study of patients who asked for allergist advice from our hospital before getting one of the COVID-19 vaccines and who received a consultation either through phone call or online or have been admitted for hospital evaluation in 2021. Results More than 300 calls and 100 online consultations for COVID-19 vaccination-related allergist advice were done in our center within one year. From the total number of 210 people who were evaluated based on a one-day hospital stay in the Allergology department, 64 patients (30.47%) have been scheduled for evaluation before vaccination because of their past or recent medical history of allergies. Nine patients had documented post-vaccination adverse events, which occurred after the first dose in seven cases, after the second dose in one case, and after the booster in one case. The reactions were mild but one was moderate. No patient was considered to have a contraindication or special precaution for COVID-19 vaccination, and all patients with reactions after the first dose could safely complete the vaccination scheme. Conclusion In conclusion, allergist advice and evaluation can significantly influence the decision to vaccinate in patients with a history of allergies.
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.