ArticleAllergy2025
Comparison of Double-Blind and Open Food Challenges for the Diagnosis of Food Allergy in Childhood: The ALDORADO Study.
Article in Allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence of Intolerance to Amines and Salicylates in Individuals with Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Nutrients · 2025Pooled it
- Allergenicity Assessment of Precision Fermentation-Derived Food Proteins.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Optimized In-House Basophil Activation Test for Pediatric Egg Allergy: Agreement with a Structured Composite Clinical Classification.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2026Article
- Advances in Food Processing Techniques for Allergenicity Reduction and Allergen Identification.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Current State of Celery Allergy: Is Discovering Api g 7 a Milestone in Diagnosing Celeriac-Allergic Patients?International journal of molecular sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDouble-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) is widely regarded as the "gold standard" to diagnose food allergy. Maximum efforts are made to reduce bias, yet DBPCFCs are costly, time-, and resource-intensive. Less demanding open food challenges are increasingly used in clinical practice. However, recommendations regarding the use of these challenges are based on low certainty of evidence, and no comparative studies have been performed using the most recent international food challenge guidelines. We hypothesised that the open food challenge is non-inferior to DBPCFC in children suspected of allergy to cashew nuts, hazelnuts or peanuts.
methodsA total of 63 children, aged 4 years and older, were included if referred for suspected IgE-mediated allergy to cashew nut, hazelnut, or peanut. All study participants underwent DBPCFC first, followed by an open food challenge for the same food. Challenge outcomes were assessed by predefined criteria into positive, negative, or inconclusive.
resultsDBPCFC and open food challenge outcomes were the same for 36/41 (87.8%) patients. Sensitivity and specificity of the open food challenge were 0.91 (95% CI 0.79, 1.03) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.63, 1.01), respectively, with an AUC value of 0.87. Eliciting and stop doses were not significantly different between both food challenges.
conclusionThe Diagnostic accuracy of open food challenge is non-inferior to that of DBPCFC. This finding implies less demanding open food challenges can be implemented for children from the age of 4 years suspected to be cashew nut, hazelnut, or peanut allergic. Further research is necessary to validate our findings and to investigate the diagnostic accuracy for other major food allergens.
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.