Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35605815›Full record

ArticleAnnals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology2022

The Role of the Allergist in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine Allergy Safety: A Pilot Study on a "Hub-and-Spoke" Model for Population-Wide Allergy Service.

Valerie Chiang, Chinmoy Saha, Jackie Yim, Elaine Y L Au, Andy K C Kan, Kong Siu Harris Hui, Tin Sum Li, Wing Lam Whitney Lo, Yuh Dong Hong, Jiaxi Ye and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) in China: Advancing Awareness, Access, Advocacy and Alliances From the Greater Bay Area to the Global HAE Community.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025
    Review
  5. Penicillin Allergy in China: Consequences of Inappropriate Skin Testing Practices and Policies.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. A novel allergist-integrative model for vaccine allergy safety.Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Valerie ChiangDivision of Clinical Immunology, Department of Pathology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Chinmoy SahaDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Jackie YimDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Elaine Y L AuDivision of Clinical Immunology, Department of Pathology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Andy K C KanDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Kong Siu Harris HuiDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Tin Sum LiDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Wing Lam Whitney LoDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Yuh Dong HongSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Jiaxi YeSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Carmen NgSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Welchie W K KoDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Healthcare, Hong Kong West Cluster, Hospital Authority, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Carmen T K HoDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Chak Sing LauDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Jianchao QuanSchool of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.
Philip H LiDivision of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong. Electronic address: liphilip@hku.hk.
Queen Mary Hospital · CNUniversity of Hong Kong · HKHospital Authority · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHong Kong started its coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination program in February 2021. A territory-wide Vaccine Allergy Safety (VAS) clinic was set up to assess individuals deemed at "higher risk" of COVID-19 vaccine-associated allergies. A novel "hub-and-spoke" model was piloted to tackle the overwhelming demand of services by allowing nonallergists to conduct assessment.

objectiveTo evaluate the outcomes of the VAS hub-and-spoke model for allergy assessment.

methodsRecords of patients attending the VAS hub-and-spoke Clinics between March and August 2021 were reviewed (n = 2725). We studied the overall results between the Hub (allergist led) and Spoke (nonallergist led) Clinics. The Hub and the Hong Kong West Cluster Spoke Clinic were selected for subgroup analysis as they saw the largest number of patients (n = 1411).

resultsA total of 2725 patients were assessed under the VAS hub-and-spoke model. Overall, 2324 patients (85.3%) were recommended to proceed with vaccination. Allergists recommended significantly more patients for vaccination than nonallergists (odds ratio = 21.58; P < .001). Subgroup analysis revealed that 881 of 1055 (83.5%) patients received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccination safely after assessment. Among those recommended vaccination, more patients assessed by allergists received their first dose of vaccination (odds ratio = 4.18; P < .001).

conclusionThe hub-and-spoke model has proven to be successful for the vaccination campaign. This study has illustrated the crucial role of allergists in countering vaccine hesitancy. Results from the study revealed considerable differences in outcomes between allergist-led and nonallergist-led clinics. Precise reasons for these differences warrant further evaluation. We are hopeful that the hub-and-spoke model can be similarly adapted for other allergist-integrative services in the future.

Indexed as

AllergistsCOVID-19 VaccinesHealth ServicesHypersensitivityPatient SafetyPhysician's RoleVaccinationHumansImmunization ProgramsOdds RatioPilot ProjectsRisk AssessmentVaccination HesitancyCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID35605815
PMCPMC9121691
OpenAlexW4282945177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.