Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38881633›Full record

ReviewZdravstveno varstvo2024

The Prevalence of Self-Reported Systemic Allergic Reaction to

Tanja Carli, Igor Locatelli, Mitja Košnik, Andreja Kukec

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Zdravstveno varstvo, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tanja CarliUniversity of Ljubljana, Faculty of Medicine, Vrazov trg 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5042-3560
Igor LocatelliUniversity of Ljubljana, Department of Biopharmaceutics and Pharmacokinetics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Aškerčeva cesta 7, 1000 Ljubljana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0052-8986
Mitja KošnikUniversity Clinic of Respiratory and Allergic Diseases Golnik, Golnik 36, 4204 Golnik, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4701-7374
Andreja KukecNational Institute of Public Health, Trubarjeva cesta 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5973-0345

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Beekeepers represent a high-allergic risk population group due to their unavoidable seasonal or persistent exposure to the elicitors of Methods: We rigorously reviewed and conducted meta-analysis on observational studies retrieved from seven electronic databases (MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, ScienceDirect, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Zoological Record), spanning data from inception to August 1, 2023. The Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal Tool was employed to assess the risk of bias. A meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize evidence. Results: Out of 468 studies, eight original articles met the inclusion criteria. The estimated overall lifetime and one-year prevalence of self-reported systemic allergic reaction to bee venom were 23.7% (95% CI: 7.7-53.4) and 7.3% (95% CI: 5.8-9.2), respectively. The estimated lifetime prevalence of self-reported systemic allergic reaction to bee venom for grades III-IV (severe systemic allergic reaction) was 6.0% (95% CI: 3.0-11.7). In general, substantial heterogeneity and a high risk of bias were observed across the majority of studies. The impact of geographical location and climate differences on the estimated lifetime prevalence is suggestive for severe systemic allergic reaction. Conclusions: Future observational cross-sectional studies should employ rigorous study designs, using validated questionnaires, and thoroughly report the observed health outcomes, verified by physicians.

Indexed as

BeekeepinghypersensitivityPrevalencePublic healthVenom

Identifiers

PMID38881633
PMCPMC11178027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.