ArticleClinical and translational allergy2026
New Adrenaline Devices for Treating Anaphylaxis: Results of a Joint Survey From the European Anaphylaxis Registry and the Allergy-Vigilance Network.
Article in Clinical and translational allergy, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdrenaline auto-injectors (AAI) are underused to treat anaphylaxis. New adrenaline devices are currently under investigation or have been recently marketed. This survey aimed to assess the perspectives from allergy-trained physicians regarding the AAI use and their expectations about new adrenaline devices.
methodsThis electronic survey was created by the European Anaphylaxis Registry and Allergy-Vigilance Network. It was proposed to their participants (March-April 2025) who were asked to rank their responses on a 11-point Likert scale (0: 'not important' to 10: 'very important'). Results are presented as median with interquartile range.
resultsOne hundred and seventy-five physicians (allergists, 59.4%) participated in this survey. There were only few barriers to AAI prescriptions. Up to 65% of participants estimated the following features as very important for new adrenaline devices: prolonged shelf life (9 [7-10]), improved storage conditions (9 [5-9]), detailed pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic data (8 [7-10]), optimised dose ranging (8 [7-10]), availability in public spaces (8 [7-10]), devices easy to carry (8 [7-9]), needle-free device (8 [6-10]). A history of anaphylaxis treated with > 1 adrenaline injection (7 [4-9]) or admitted to intensive care unit (7 [3-8]) were reported as the most important barriers to use new adrenaline devices. 75% of participants felt that recommendations from allergy societies and more clinical data are important measures to reduce barriers to new adrenaline devices.
conclusionsOur data provide insights from allergy-trained physicians into AAI limitations and expectations on new adrenaline devices. To advance them, input from allergy societies and more clinical data from anaphylaxis patients are needed.
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.