ArticleThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global2023
Development and validation of assessment tools for food allergy-related knowledge and management confidence.
Article in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The risk of occupational anaphylaxis in beekeepers: an educational public health intervention.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Given the life-threatening nature of food allergy (FA), it is important to assess the level of knowledge among families with food-allergic patients and their ability to cope with anaphylaxis. This study constructed a FA knowledge questionnaire (FAKQ) and confidence in FA management skills (CIFAMS) questionnaire to assess understanding and attitudes toward FA management in food-allergic families. Methods: Items from literature review and expert panel showing ≥80% content validity index and semantic equivalence were selected for translation into Chinese. These questionnaires underwent feasibility pilot testing followed by cross-sectional validation to assess their psychometric properties of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity with a FA quality-of-life questionnaire and discriminant validity. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to confirm their factor structure. Results: A total of 155 subjects (104 patients and 51 parents) completed a 20-item FAKQ and 10-item CIFAMS. Both tools showed acceptable internal consistency in baseline and retest groups. FAKQ and CIFAMS correlated for all subjects ( Conclusion: FAKQ and CIFAMS developed by our group are valid and reliable in assessing knowledge and confidence in FA management in patients and parents. These tools are crucial for formulating education programs and advocacy campaigns for FA.
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.