SynthesisInternational archives of allergy and immunology2026
Predictors of Fatal Anaphylaxis: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in International archives of allergy and 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFatal anaphylaxis is a rare but devastating outcome of severe allergic reactions. Identifying predictors of fatal anaphylaxis is essential to guide prevention, early intervention, education, and management strategies.
methodsA systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive health sciences librarian-assisted search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science identified studies published from inception to December 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed observational studies and randomized controlled trials investigating fatal anaphylaxis in adults and children. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools.
resultsA total of 3,006 studies were identified through five databases. After removing 1,038 duplicates, 1,968 unique records were screened. Of these, 136 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 28 met the inclusion criteria. The included studies were conducted across 20 countries. Of the 28 included studies, 27 were retrospective cohort designs and one was a case-control study. This predominance of retrospective designs is expected given the rare and unpredictable nature of fatal anaphylaxis. Food allergens (particularly peanuts and cow's milk), medications (e.g., antibiotics, contrast media, and neuromuscular blockers), and insect stings were the most common triggers of fatal anaphylaxis. Asthma, cardiovascular comorbidities, and older age (≥65 years) were frequently reported predictors of mortality. Delayed epinephrine administration defined as more than 30 min after symptom onset or failure to administer in the prehospital setting was also associated with fatal outcomes. Subgroup analyses identified higher risk among patients with multiple comorbidities and those exposed to high-risk allergens, including peanuts and cow's milk in children (<18 years) and perioperative medications in older adults (≥65 years). Risk of bias analysis indicated moderate study quality, with limitations largely due to retrospective designs and inconsistent reporting.
conclusionsAsthma, cardiovascular comorbidities, older age, and delayed epinephrine administration were key predictors of fatal anaphylaxis. These findings highlight the need for timely intervention and targeted strategies, while emphasizing the importance of improved global data and standardized methodologies.
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.