ArticleAllergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology2026
Patient preferences in the treatment of children with pollen-related allergic rhinitis.
Article in Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAllergic rhinitis (AR) is a common condition affecting 23% of children in Europe. Of the AR-patients, 40-72% do not follow the treatment instructions as provided by their clinician. Shared decision making is effective in improving adherence to treatment. Knowing treatment preferences of children and adolescents can help improve shared decision making.
objectiveTo determine the preferential treatment of children and adolescents with AR.
methodsThis study is a secondary analysis. Data from a single-blinded randomized controlled trial were used. The primary outcome measure of the original study was percentage of symptom-free days. Children aged 6-18 were randomised in three treatment groups: antihistamines (AH) on-demand, intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) continuous or INCS on-demand. Preferences were mapped out by questionnaires at the start and end of the study. The study design was approved by the Ethical Review Board of the Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam (No. MEC-2012-354). Prior to performing the trial, it was registered (Netherlands Trial Register No. NL3276).
resultsAt the end of the study AH on-demand was the preferential treatment arm (54.7%, N = 76/139). Preferences for continuous use over on-demand use and intranasal over oral therapy were dependent of treatment group (p = 0.027, p = 0.004). Of the participants, 36.7% chose their study medication as preferential treatment. Adolescents had more distinct treatment preferences than children (p = 0.004). Of the adolescents, 63% preferred AH on demand (P = 0.005), whereas children did not show a significant preference.
conclusionThere is a significant difference in preferences for treatment for AR between children and adolescents. AH on-demand is the most preferred medication type for AR. Shared decision making in choosing AR treatment should be used to improve the treatment compliance.
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.