ReviewJournal of asthma and allergy2022
Prevalence, Clinical Manifestations, Treatment, and Clinical Course of Chronic Urticaria in Elderly: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of asthma and allergy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Clinical phenotypes and molecular endotypes of chronic urticaria: Linking clinical expression to underlying immune mechanisms.Asia Pacific allergy · 2026Review
- Evaluation of the Immune Checkpoints, TIM-3 and PD-1, as well as Anti-Inflammatory Cytokines IL-10, and TGF-β along with Diseases Activity in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria.International journal of molecular and cellular medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Data specific to the epidemiology, clinical features, and management of chronic urticaria (CU) in the geriatric population remain limited and not well understood. We aim to systematically review the prevalence, clinical manifestations, treatment, and clinical course of elderly patients with CU. Patients and methods: Original articles that included data of elderly (aged >60 years) with CU that were published until February 2021 were searched in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase using predfefined search terms. Related articles were evaluated according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. Results: Among the included 85 studies and 1,112,066 elderly CU patients, most (57.4%) were women. The prevalence of elderly CU in the general population ranged from 0.2-2.8%, and from 0.7-33.3% among all CU patients. Compared to adult CU, elderly CU patients had a higher percentage of wheal alone (73.9%), and lower rate of positive autologous serum skin test and atopy. Gastrointestinal diseases were the most common comorbidity (71.9%), and there was a high rate of malignancies and autoimmune diseases. Second generation H Conclusion: Elderly CU was found to be different from adult CU in both clinical and laboratory aspects. H
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.