ArticleClinical and translational allergy2026
Biphasic, Refractory, and Persistent Anaphylaxis in Children.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA Delphi consensus report refined anaphylaxis phenotypes as biphasic, refractory, and persistent anaphylaxis (BA, RA, and PA). To date, no study in either pediatric or adult populations has comprehensively evaluated the full spectrum of anaphylaxis phenotypes as outlined in this consensus. The primary aim of this study was to identify these phenotypes and compare them with conventional anaphylaxis in children.
methodsPatients aged ≤ 18 years who were diagnosed with or followed up for anaphylaxis at our department over the past 15 years were retrospectively screened for this study. All anaphylaxis cases were categorized as conventional anaphylaxis (Group 1) or as BA, RA, and PA phenotypes (Group 2). A comparative analysis was conducted between Group 1 and Group 2 with respect to demographics, triggers, clinical features, severity, management, and outcomes.
resultsA total of 393 patients and 529 anaphylaxis episodes were included. Twenty-six (6.6%) of all anaphylaxis cases were classified as BA (3.5%), RA (1.5%), or PA (1.5%). For BA, the median time to recurrence of symptoms and signs was 4 h (1-24 h), whereas the median duration of PA manifestations was 4 h (4-6 h). These phenotypes (Group 2) were more common in older children and were associated with increased cardiovascular manifestations, greater severity, and higher use of systemic corticosteroid (p < 0.001). They did not differ significantly from Group 1 with respect to gender, comorbidities, family history of atopy, timing or location of the anaphylaxis, or number of episodes. Drugs, followed by venoms, were more frequent triggers in Group 2, whereas food was significantly more common in Group 1 (p < 0.05). IM adrenaline was administered in 69.2% of Group 2 and 52.3% of Group 1, with no significant difference (p > 0.05). Comparisons among BA, RA, and PA could not be performed due to the limited sample size within each phenotype.
conclusionsBA, RA, and PA are rare anaphylaxis phenotypes, more frequently drug or venom induced, seen at older ages, with ongoing gaps in proper IM adrenaline use.
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.