ArticleThe World Allergy Organization journal2022
World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines update - IV - A quality appraisal with the AGREE II instrument.
Article in The World Allergy Organization journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cow's Milk Protein Allergy: ETAPA Survey on Pediatric Management and Tolerance Acquisition.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) guidelines update - X - Breastfeeding a baby with cow's milk allergy.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023Article
- Nutritional Strategies for the Prevention and Management of Cow's Milk Allergy in the Pediatric Age.Nutrients · 2023Review
- Molecular Allergy Diagnostics in Children with Cow's Milk Allergy: Prediction of Oral Food Challenge Response in Clinical Practice.Journal of immunology research · 2023Article
- Perspectives on Non-IgE-Mediated Gastrointestinal Food Allergy in Pediatrics: A Review of Current Evidence and Guidelines.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2023Review
- Hydrolyzed rice formula for dietary management of infants with cow's milk allergy.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2022Review
- Oral Immunotherapy for Children with Cow's Milk Allergy: A Practical Approach.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Since the publication of The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines in 2010, a number of other guidelines, expert opinions, and position papers relating to the management of cow's milk allergy (CMA) have been published. We aimed to systematically review the quality of the guidelines on CMA diagnosis and management in children and/or adults published between 2010 and 2020. Methods: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, World Health Organization Global Index Medicus, and Turning Research into Practice databases as well as website guideline repositories were searched from January 2010 until May 2020. Any clinical practice recommendations and/or guidelines focusing on the diagnosis and management of CMA in children and/or adults developed or endorsed by professional scientific societies or organizations were included. The guidelines were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool, a 23-item tool organized within 6 domains and 2 global rating items. Results: We included 12 guidelines; 8 were developed by national and 4 by international organizations. The quality scores for each domain varied: of all domains, the clarity of presentation domain had the highest median score (92%; Q1-Q3 81-100%), whereas rigor of development had the lowest median score (30%; Q1-Q3 15-67%). The median scores (Q1-Q3) for individual domains were as follows: scope and purpose 82% (70-99%), stakeholder involvement 63% (21-79%), rigor of development 30% (15-67%), clarity of presentation 92% (81-100%), applicability 68% (57-75%), and editorial independence 75% (69-100%). The median overall score was 70% (58-89%). Only 1 guideline (from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE]) achieved top ratings (100%) in five domains and the overall score. Three guidelines (from the NICE, the British Society for Allergy & Clinical Immunology [BSACI] and WAO) achieved the highest ratings (100%) in at least 3 domains and the overall score. Conclusion: The majority of identified guidelines were of good or very good quality. However, the weakest point was the rigor of development domain, mostly due to unclear description of strengths and limitations of the body of evidence and the procedure for updating the guidelines.
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.