ArticleThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice2024
Development and Evaluation of Modified Criteria for Infant and Toddler Anaphylaxis.
Article in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nationwide epidemiology and healthcare burden of pediatric anaphylaxis in Thailand: A population-based study, 2019-2023.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- Epinephrine Underuse for Anaphylaxis in Infants and Toddlers: A Practical Review for Pediatricians.Paediatric drugs · 2026Review
- Food-induced anaphylaxis in children less than 2 years of age.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2025Article
- Anaphylaxis definition, overview, and clinical support tool: 2024 consensus report-a GAThe Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2025Article
- Oral Immunotherapy Should Play a Key Role in Preschool Food Allergy Management.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent clinical criteria for identifying anaphylaxis do not account for unique aspects of infant anaphylaxis presentation and have not been validated in patients younger than 2 years of age. This may contribute to under recognition and is thus an unmet need.
objectiveTo demonstrate age-specific signs and symptoms that more accurately identify anaphylaxis in young children and to develop and compare modified criteria for "likely anaphylaxis" against the widely used 2006 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN) criteria.
methodsRetrospective chart review of 337 clinical encounters presenting with suspected allergic or anaphylactic reactions to a pediatric emergency department. Modified criteria for likely anaphylaxis were developed and evaluated against the NIAID/FAAN criteria.
resultsThe study population included 33% infants (age < 12 mo), 39% toddlers (age 12 mo to < 36 mo), and 29% children (age ≥ 36 mo). The NIAID/FAAN criteria captured 85% of all patient encounters in the study and the modified criteria captured 98% (P < .001). Compared with NIAID/FAAN criteria, modified criteria had 22.8% improved performance among infants (p < .001) and 10.3% improved performance among toddlers (P = .04).
conclusionsWe developed modified anaphylaxis clinical criteria that incorporated symptoms specific to infants and young children. The modified criteria increased identification of anaphylaxis in infants and potentially toddlers. Future research is needed to validate our findings on a larger cohort.
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.