SynthesisClinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology2026
Quality and Consistency of Penicillin Allergy Delabelling Guidelines: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
OBJECTIVE AND
designThis systematic review compared the scope, purpose, and recommendations of internationally published penicillin allergy delabelling guidelines (PADLGs) and assessed their quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases, and Google, Google Scholar, websites of professional allergy societies (n = 95), and guideline repositories (n = 16) was conducted to August 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Any document that reported itself as being an evidence-based guideline, practice guideline, expert recommendation, consensus statement, position paper, or practice parameter for penicillin allergy delabelling ('PADL-G') was eligible for inclusion. Only those developed for use by health care professionals were included. Guidelines for community or patient use and hospital protocols or fact sheets were excluded.
resultsEighteen guidelines published between 2014 and 2024 were identified, representing 12 countries across four regions. PADLGs varied in scope, target users, and clinical recommendations, both within and across clinical settings. Most provided recommendations for risk stratification, testing, and delabelling methods, with many supporting direct delabelling/direct challenge in low-risk patients. Substantial variation was observed in risk assessment tools, eligibility criteria, and post-test delabelling strategies. Overall, the quality of PADLGs was low, with only two meeting predefined high-quality criteria. Critical gaps included limited methodological rigour, poor stakeholder involvement, and lack of guidance for real-world implementation.
conclusionsTo support safe and scalable PADL approaches, clearer, more consistent, and methodologically robust guidelines are needed to address the global burden of inappropriate penicillin allergy labels. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The protocol for this review was prospectively registered at Open Science Framework: osf.io/9fvr7.
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.