ReviewCurrent allergy and asthma reports2025
Emergency Monitoring Following A Diagnosis of Anaphylaxis.
Review in Current allergy and asthma reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of the reviewIn this review we explore expanding options for monitoring following anaphylaxis in the home or community setting. We review recent literature to help identify who might benefit from watchful waiting at home versus immediate emergency medical service (EMS) activation following anaphylaxis. RECENT
findingsRecent studies confirm that most patients respond promptly, completely, with a durable response to a single dose of epinephrine for anaphylaxis. In monophasic anaphylaxis, reflexive emergency monitoring has been found to have minimal benefit. In recent years, studies show increasing emergency department utilization for anaphylaxis, though the risk of fatal anaphylaxis remains exceedingly low. Identifying patients at risk for severe anaphylaxis is imprecise, though several risk factors have been associated with higher chances of severe reactions. Reflexive emergency monitoring following anaphylaxis is not necessary in all cases of anaphylaxis. Carefully selected patients may benefit from watchful waiting at home. Engaging in shared decision making is critical in this new era of personalized allergy action plans. Future studies are necessary to refine our understanding of the full risks and benefits of home monitoring following anaphylaxis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40627262What 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.