ArticleClinical and translational allergy2026
Clinical Outcome Associated With Beta-Lactam Allergy Labels in Hospitalized Patients in Belgium.
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. 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.
- Clinical Outcome Associated With Beta-Lactam Allergy Labels in Hospitalized Patients in Belgium.Clinical and translational allergy · 2026Article
- Impact Assessment of the Allergy Fact Checker, a Clinical Decision Support Tool for Noninvasive Beta-Lactam Antibiotic Allergy Label Delabeling: Protocol for a Multicenter Crossover Cluster-Controlled Study.JMIR research protocols · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn the United States, beta-lactam allergy labels (BLAL) are documented in 9%-16% of hospitalized patients and associated with worse clinical outcomes such as increased mortality, length of hospital stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and use of alternative antibiotics, providing an incentive for broad delabeling protocols. In Europe, BLAL prevalences are lower (0.6%-5%) and the association with clinical outcomes insufficiently explored. Therefore, we assessed the association between BLAL and penicillin allergy label (PenAL) and clinical outcomes and antibiotic use in hospitalized patients in Belgium.
methodsRetrospective population-based cohort study of all patients admitted to the University Hospitals Leuven between 2010 and 2018 for pneumonia, pyelonephritis (therapeutic indications), or appendectomy, coronary artery bypass grafting, total knee or hip replacement (prophylactic indications) or heart, kidney, liver, or lung transplantation (mixed indications). Multivariable regression analysis was performed, using BLAL or PenAL as independent variable, and age, gender, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and diagnosis as a priori hypothesized confounders.
resultsWe included 21,999 patients accounting for 23,842 admissions. A BLAL was recorded in 1394 (6.3%) patients, with 1113 (5.1%) having an unspecified PenAL. An increased use of next-line antibiotics was observed among patients with BLAL or PenAL. However, BLAL or PenAL were not associated with altered in-hospital or 3-month post-hospitalization mortality, LOS or ICU admission.
conclusionDespite altered antibiotic use, we observed no association of BLAL or PenAL with clinical outcome parameters, highlighting regional differences and limiting transferability of non-EU findings to guide EU delabeling protocols.
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.