Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41278224›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in allergy2025

Burden of allergic rhinitis in the United Kingdom.

Michael Jones, Hilary Shepherd, Diane Hatziioanou, Daphne Martin, Chisomo Mutafya, Ulf Bohman, Susan Hodgson, Rachael Williams

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. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

8 authors.

Michael JonesClinical Research Group, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Hilary ShepherdClinical Practice Research Datalink, London, United Kingdom.
Diane HatziioanouClinical Practice Research Datalink, London, United Kingdom.
Daphne MartinClinical Practice Research Datalink, London, United Kingdom.
Chisomo MutafyaClinical Practice Research Datalink, London, United Kingdom.
Ulf BohmanSpecialty Diagnostics Group, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Uppsala, Sweden.
Susan HodgsonClinical Practice Research Datalink, London, United Kingdom.
Rachael WilliamsClinical Practice Research Datalink, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a systemic respiratory condition that is associated with a considerable humanistic burden and is frequently underdiagnosed. Despite the known effects of AR on individual patient well-being, the wider impact of AR on the UK healthcare system remains poorly defined. We aimed to compare healthcare resource use (HCRU) posed by this disease across different age groups between patients who were diagnosed in primary care only vs. those who have a secondary care diagnosis. Methods: In this retrospective, observational study, patients with an AR record (AR diagnosis) and patients with a record of presenting with AR symptoms but no previous AR diagnosis (AR presentation) in the UK between 2009 and 2019 were defined from primary care and secondary care databases. Patients in the AR diagnosis cohort were further categorized based on whether they had a diagnostic code in primary care only, or any relevant diagnostic code(s) in secondary care for allergist or Ear, Nose, and Throat (ENT) services referrals. Key outcomes included specialist referrals, general practitioner (GP) visits, respiratory-related hospitalizations, GP-prescribed AR-related prescriptions, and coincident asthma. Results: A total of 3,344,716 patients were defined as presenting signs of AR and 677,771 patients were defined as having an AR diagnosis between 2009 and 2019. Only 11.7% of the AR presentation group received ≥1 referral to an allergist or ENT, and most patients in the AR diagnosis group received a diagnosis in primary care only (89.3%). Compared to their HCRU before diagnosis, patients diagnosed with AR experienced an increase in mean GP visits [7.5-10.0 per patient per year (PPPY)], respiratory-related hospitalizations (5.5-7.1 PPPY), and AR-related medications (mean 8.8-15.0 PPPY). Patients with at least one diagnostic code in secondary care generally reported higher HCRU post-diagnosis than those in primary care. The incidence rate of asthma was lower after AR diagnosis compared to before, with a shorter interval between the onset of asthma and the diagnosis of AR. Conclusion: Patients with AR impose a greater burden on the UK healthcare system following their diagnosis, especially those who require follow-up from respiratory specialists.

Indexed as

allergic rhinitisasthmaGP visitshealthcare resource usehospitalizationsprescriptionsUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID41278224
PMCPMC12631609

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.