ArticleThe World Allergy Organization journal2023
Comparison of two diagnostic criteria in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis in a tertiary adult allergy clinic.
Article in The World Allergy Organization journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global Burden of Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis Associated With 33 Classes of Antibiotics (1968-2024): A Pharmacovigilance Analysis.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Tryptase Levels for Pediatric Anaphylaxis: A Case-Control Study.International archives of allergy and immunology · 2025Article
- Retrospective evaluation of pediatric anaphylaxis cases according to WAO and NIAID/FAAN/EAACI criteria: A single center experience.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2024Article
- Apples and pears serve the same purpose: Better diagnosis for anaphylaxis.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023Article
- Comparison of recent anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria in real life: Can more patients be diagnosed as having anaphylaxis?The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023Article
- Clinical criteria for anaphylaxis: Comparing apples and pears.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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anaphylaxis is a very dynamic issue with its incidence and trigger profile changing over the years. We aimed to compile the characteristics of anaphylaxis cases diagnosed in our clinic prospectively and to make a comparison between diagnostic criteria proposed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN) and World Allergy Organization (WAO). Method: Three-item diagnostic criteria recommended by NIAID/FAAN (2006) were used in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis. The clinical features of the cases, risk factors, etiologies, severity of anaphylaxis, and treatment approach were determined. The same patients were also classified by current WAO diagnostic criteria. Results: A total of 204 patients (158F/46 M, median age 45.3 years) were included. Drugs (65.2%), venom (9.8%) and food allergies (9.3%) were the top 3 etiologies. Among drug triggers, chemotherapeutics were the most common (17.7%), followed by antibiotics (15.3%) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (14.2%). The patients were mostly diagnosed with the second criterion (84.8%), followed by the first criterion (11.8%) and the third criterion (3.4%) of the NIAID/FAAN criteria. In terms of WAO criteria, 82.8% of the patients were diagnosed with the first criterion, and 14.3% with the second criterion while 2.9% of the patients did not meet the WAO criteria. The severity of anaphylaxis was evaluated as grade-2, 3 and 4 in 30.9%, 64.2%, and 4.9% of the patients, respectively. Adrenaline was administered to 31.9% of the patients especially who had angioedema and bronchospasm (p = 0.04). Conclusion: Our data suggest that covering more details in patient's history may prevent possible underdiagnosis and WAO diagnostic criteria seem to be insufficient in some patients. We believe that our results will contribute to the literature on anaphylaxis and would be groundwork for future studies.
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.