Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41210304›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in allergy2025

Allergy diagnostic performance of FastCheckPOC 20 Atopy.

Hannes Nösslinger, Ewald Mair, Gertie J Oostingh, Verena Ahlgrimm-Siess, Anna Ringauf, Roland Lang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Hannes Nösslinger *Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Hospital of Merano (SABES-ASDAA), Teaching Hospital of Paracelsus Medical University, Merano-Meran, Italy.
Ewald Mair *Registered Pediatrician (SABES-ASDAA), Brunico-Bruneck, Italy.
Gertie J OostinghBiomedical Sciences, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Puch/Salzburg, Austria.
Verena Ahlgrimm-SiessDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, University Hospital of the Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Anna RingaufMacroArray Diagnostics (MADx), Vienna, Austria.
Roland LangDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, University Hospital of the Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The increasing prevalence of allergic diseases, along with their diagnosis and treatment, presents a growing challenge in health care. To reduce this burden, a highly sensitive and specific point-of-care test for detecting sensitization could be implemented in a primary health care setting. The study aimed to investigate the accuracy of FastCheckPOC 20 Atopy (FCP20) in comparison with the multiplex assay Allergy Explorer 2 (ALEX Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 215 participants were recruited from South Tyrol, Italy. Serum samples were analyzed using both FCP20 and ALEX Results: The overall sensitivity of the FCP20 was 43.3% (95% CI: 40.3%-46.2%), and the specificity was 92.1% (95% CI: 91.1%-93.0%). Inhalation allergens showed a higher sensitivity than food allergens; the grass pollen (gx17) exhibited the highest sensitivity at 79.8% (95% CI: 72.6%-85.7%). Among patients with severe allergic symptoms, bronchial asthma, or eczema, sensitivity increased to over 83%. Conclusions: FCP20 demonstrates high specificity and may be considered for the exclusion of sensitization to selected allergens, but its low sensitivity limits its utility as a general screening tool.

Indexed as

allergy and immunologyatopyIgElateral flow testmolecular diagnosticspoint-of-care testprimary care

Identifiers

PMID41210304
PMCPMC12592802

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.