ArticleCureus2025
Penicillin Allergy Delabeling: Provider Knowledge, Practice Patterns, and Barriers Among Internal Medicine Residents in a Large Urban Community Teaching Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Penicillin allergy delabeling in a German University Hospital-implementation in inpatient settings: the PenGuin Pilot Study.Infection · 2026Article
- Self-Reported Penicillin Allergy, Alternative Antibiotics, and Implant Outcomes: A Retrospective Study.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPenicillin allergy is the most frequently reported drug allergy, yet up to 90% of labels are inaccurate. These erroneous labels contribute to suboptimal antibiotic use, higher healthcare costs, and increased antimicrobial resistance. Despite growing evidence supporting delabeling, provider hesitancy and knowledge gaps persist.
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the awareness, confidence, and clinical decision-making of internal medicine residents regarding penicillin allergy delabeling within a large community hospital setting. Specifically, we seek to identify existing knowledge gaps, provider attitudes, and institutional barriers that may hinder appropriate delabeling efforts.
methodsA cross-sectional, anonymous electronic survey was administered to internal medicine residents at Ascension Saint Joseph Hospital in Chicago. The survey included questions on allergy knowledge, delabeling practices, confidence in risk stratification, and perceived barriers. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests.
resultsOf 66 residents invited, 42.4% (n = 28) responded. While 60.7% (n = 17) reported self-perceived knowledge on how to stratify beta-lactam allergy risk, only 12% (n = 2) felt confident in doing so. Familiarity with the PEN-FAST score increased with training level (postgraduate year (PGY)1: 0%; PGY3: 77%; p = 0.017). Half of the respondents had removed a penicillin allergy label, with significant differences by training level (p
conclusionsSignificant gaps exist in residents' knowledge and confidence regarding the delabeling of beta-lactam allergies. Lack of standardized training and protocols further hinders effective implementation. Structured educational interventions and institutional support are needed to promote safe and evidence-based delabeling practices as part of antimicrobial stewardship.
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.