ArticleNorthern clinics of Istanbul2023
Evaluation of the triggers and the treatment models of anaphylaxis in pediatric patients.
Article in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Age-related differences in pediatric anaphylaxis: a single-center experience.BMC pediatrics · 2026Observational
- Exploring the anti-anaphylaxis potential of natural products: A Review.Inflammopharmacology · 2025Review
- Pediatric Anaphylaxis in Emergency Care: A Detailed Analysis of Demographic and Laboratory Findings.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2025Article
- Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis: National Database Analysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAnaphylaxis is an acute, life-threatening systemic hypersensitivity reaction. We aimed to evaluate the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients presenting with anaphylaxis, as well as triggers and risk factors, and to determine the rate of adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) usage.
methodsThe study was planned in the pediatric allergy outpatient clinic over a 1-year period. The data of children diagnosed with anaphylaxis were evaluated retrospectively; demographic characteristics, causes of anaphylaxis, and treatment modalities were recorded in the created study form.
resultsEighty children (29 females) with a median age of 6.5 years (range: 1 month-17 years) were evaluated. The most common triggers were foods under 2 years of age (73%), and drugs (70%) above 2 years of age. Nearly half of the anaphylaxis episodes (n=41, 51.3%) occurred at home. Cutaneous and respiratory symptoms were the most commonly reported complaints (98.8%). The median age of the patients at the first attack with severe anaphylaxis (n=29, 36.3%) was significantly higher than the rest (p:0.007). The age at onset of the reaction (p:0.006) and occurrence of the reaction in hospital conditions (p<0.001) were determined to be significant risk factors for severe anaphylaxis. Most of them received antihistamines (95.7%) and corticosteroids (91.3%), while 78.3% received adrenaline. Only 9.5% of patients with recurrent episodes of anaphylaxis used AAIs.
conclusionFoods in infants and drugs in older children were the leading causative allergens of anaphylaxis. The most common clinical manifestations were respiratory and cutaneous symptoms. The older age at onset of the reaction and the occurrence of the reaction in hospital conditions were determined to be significant risk factors for severe anaphylaxis. It was determined that the frequency of AAI use was low among patients and their families.
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.